From: Jonathan Rochkind <jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 94 11:32:01 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: clipper and export
Message-ID: <199407221831.OAA10336@cs.oberlin.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Is anyone else distrubed by the way that encryption export policy and the
clipper chip seem to be linked {in administration policy, and in the
press?
The letter from Gore to Cantwell certainly indicates this. He got her
to refrain from trying to liberalize export by saying that he'd look
into relaxing clipper. 
This seems awfully insidious, for a variety of reasons. I think everyone
has got to make greater efforts to seperate these two issues in the public
s mind. If we need to prevent encryption export for national security
reasons, as the administration alleges, then that doesn't neccesarily
have any relation on whether we need to adopt key escrow too.And if 
key escrow is neccesary for law enforcement, as they allege, that doesn't
say _anything_ about whether encryption export should be liberalized
or not. 
Of course, scrutinizing administration policy revelas the link without
too much dificulty. They want to make clipper a de facto standard, and
the only way they're going to be able to accomplish this is by 
refusing to allow exportation of anything _but_ clipper. But the 
administration isn't publically giving this line of reasoning, because
it makes them look bad, and shows that they are mis-using the legislation
that allows them to ban exportation of encryption for their own pro-Clipper
strategies. But they still manage to link the two issues, as in the 
"compromise" with Ms. Cantwell, without giving any good reason
for the two issues to be related!
I don't think we should let them get away with this. If the two
issues are going to be linked like this, we the public have got to demand
and explanation or rational for doing this. Why did the administration
basically offer to re-think clipper _if_ Cantwell didn't try to 
liberalize export? And when they can't give a good answer, we the cypherpunks
have got to offer our explanation.
 
As it is, they're getting a tactical olitical freebie. They've managed to 
link the issues of export restrictions and clipper such that Joe Public
sees how the policies are linked, _without_ giving any actual reasons
for the link, because those reasons would make them look so bad.