1994-07-01 - Re: Devil’s Advocate (again)

Header Data

From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
To: Michael Handler <grendel@netaxs.com>
Message Hash: 474cd28f4f9dc61b06977c12cb775b43e9f6f865fa53b676eb03894025c64321
Message ID: <Pine.3.87.9407011310.A21482-0100000@crl.crl.com>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9407011532.A929-0100000@unix2.netaxs.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-01 21:30:37 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 14:30:37 PDT

Raw message

From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 14:30:37 PDT
To: Michael Handler <grendel@netaxs.com>
Subject: Re: Devil's Advocate (again)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9407011532.A929-0100000@unix2.netaxs.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9407011310.A21482-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Fri, 1 Jul 1994, Michael Handler wrote:

> . . . Do you think the NSA cares either about the majority of US laws 
> or the admissibility of evidence? 

Actually, yes, for two reasons:  First, they cannot overtly break the 
law.  Other groups of thugs such as the FBI, the justice system, etc. 
will take umbridge if their turf is invaded.  Second, though the NSA must 
have its share of evil people, they must also have their share of decent 
folks.  Decent folks would include whistleblowers who could blow the 
cover of the NSA's bad folks.  Hell, they might even use strong crypto 
routed through anonymous remailers!

> If they want your key badly enough, 
> they will get it, and in all probability will have no compunctions 
> against any of those methods.

All actions have costs.  How badly do they have to want it to risk 
exposure to public/legal scrutiny?  Even if they want it that much, must 
we assume they have no compunctions?  Calm down.  If the world were as 
lopsided as some of us seem to think, we would all be in jail or in the 
ground.  Perceptions of powerlessness result in paralysis.  Don't let the 
boogyman keep you from writing code.

 S a n d y