From: Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 94 11:13:08 PDT
Subject: Re: "Key Escrow" --- the very idea
In-Reply-To: <9407241029.AA10506@anchor.ho.att.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9407241252.A15200-0100000@xmission>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Sun, 24 Jul 1994 wcs@anchor.ho.att.com wrote:
> I have to agree, and I distinguish between "real crimes" vs. "laws".
> a) Untraceable payments for physical violent crimes (e.g. kidnap ransom)
A leo solicits a payment for the murder of someone and busts you.  The 
murderer is caught and testifies.  This is the standard way murders are 
solved.  Name a case where a wiretap has done it.  I dare you.

> b) Better communications for conspiring to do violence (murder contracts...)
So talk to people and narc on them.

> c) Bank Robbery (any respectable digibank can protect itself technically,
>    but we're already seeing Teller Machine card forging in Britain,
>    and other banks will probably have weaknesses as we learn digibanking.)
Ahm, all the more reason for people to use strong crypto.  You don't 
protect yourself by not having a gun, but by having a biger one that the 
rober.

> d) Forgery - digital signatures are great, if they're long enough,
>    but protecting your keys is more critical than it used to be.
True, again see c)

> e) Fraud - you'll probably have to do a better job checking reputations
>    for a digital stockbroker living behind anonymous remailers paid with
>    digicash than you currently do for physically traceable brokers like
>    Ivan Boesky. 
True.
 
> f) Extortion - it's hard to break somebody's legs in cyberspace,
>    but you can send the threat that way, and tell where to send the money;
>    you can also threaten to publish their private key which you stole.
At which point they sign a retraction of their private key.

> The 4th amendment's terms aren't for you - they're for the government
> to obey.  While I suspect the authors of the amendment assumed the
> government would seize criminals and search for them, they don't
> claim that power as their right, they only place limits on it.
Amen.  I think we need to throw out the concept of fruits of a poisioned 
tree and start puting criminals that break the 4th amendment in prision.
(ok, flame me.)

Berzerk.