From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 95 19:15:32 PDT
To: jim@acm.org
Subject: Re: NSA says Joe Sixpack won't buy crypto
In-Reply-To: <199509040139.SAA26859@mycroft.rand.org>
Message-ID: <199509040212.TAA03591@netcom10.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



JG:
>Rather than finding ways to justify and maintain current budgets     
>and bureaucracies, why not just cough up the peace dividend?  

taking money from a bureacracy is like the exact opposite of taking
candy from a baby. but hell, maybe you could get a job as a spook
in their dark tunnels and "show them the light" so to speak. <g>

>I misstated his point to some extent here.  

oh right, any perceived boneheadness on the part of a premiere spook
is surely in the eye of the beholder <g>

>  He indicated
>that Europe has embraced GSM and the US has not (yet) embraced anything
>equivalent (about which more below).

well, thanks for clearing up the assertion but I stand by my rant.
(and BTW, thank you for the wonderful opportunity, one must prize every
opportunity to get one's blood boiling to know one is alive). the
US may very well not have "embraced" any encryption standard because
the NSA is trying to THROW A @#$%^&* WRENCH INTO ANY STANDARD THAT
IS DEVELOPED. that is EXACTLY WHAT CLIPPER WAS AN ATTEMPT TO DO.

y'know that we MAY HAVE WIDESPREAD ENCRYPTION BY NOW if the NSA has
not continually interefered with what is normally a NATURAL PROCESS
of standards creation in the technological community. Clipper is
a black, black mark not only because of what it tried to *introduce*,
but also of what it tried to *replace*.

again, the fact that we do not have widespread encryption in the U.S.
acc. to the NSA reminds me of the anecdote of the murderer going before
the court and stating that he deserved leniency because he was an
orphan. THE NSA HAS TRIED TO MURDER CRYPTO IN THE U.S. and then say,
"gosh!! there's no crypto!! no one has it!! therefore, no one wants it!!
why is everyone so angry when we tried to keep it from everyone when
nobody wants it"? @#$%^&*!!!

again, I suggest that the lack of crypto in the US is due to a 
*political* situation, and nothing else. the NSA of course would like
to deny that, and justify the *political* situation based on something else
(such as that people don't really want encryption or that it is not really
in the nation's best interests)
 
>Clipper wasn't a fiasco from the gov't's point of view if you look at what
>it prevented rather than what it achieved.  By now the DES-based AT&T
>encryption box might be the US standard if the Gov't hadn't intervened by
>"incentivizing" them around the time of the Clipper roll-out. 

exactly. THE MARKET COULD HAVE BEEN MATURING LONG AGO INSTEAD OF 
THROWN INTO CONFUSION.  we could have been on the path to improving 
encryption capability. and Clipper is only the product that we *saw*
in front of the world. did anything in the Clipper announcement talk
about the government collusion with AT&T? it is patently obvious that
the NSA has long worked behind the scenes to try to sabotage crypto,
and that Clipper was only the most desperate instance that we *heard*
about.

of course, when there is widespread crypto the NSA will probably try
to justify its existence based on the widespread crypto in the world,
and take credit for its introduction. "why, after all, Clipper was
a major step in introducing good encryption to the masses".  @#$%^&*

> It was
>rady to go and was already in production when Clipper got rushed up.  As
>it is there is now no standard and most traffic is still in clear.

indeed!! true progress!! the government has accomplished its mission
of sabotaging privacy!! so Clipper is a tremendous success in sowing
fear of the NSA into every American!! in throwing the standards process
into total confusion!!

JG, let me ask you a question. imagine there was some foreign government
agency, say of a totalitarian government, that wanted to prevent the
"spread of cyberspace" around the world. don't you think they could
be quite effective in  killing the Internet as it was growing? it would
be quite trivial to insert agent-provacateurs into all the open 
standards-making Internet conventions. where would we be now if this
happened?

cryptography is very intrinsic to cyberspace, and it would be quite
ubiquitous now if it werent for the reprehensible covert and overt 
NSA wrench-throwing acts. the NSA is sabotaging the natural growth of 
cyberspace, uneqivocally. I hope that every person in the NSA who
reads about Netscape or uses it, the Web, or the Internet,  hangs hi/her
head in shame, that he worked in an agency that helped work *against* the 
reality that created these wonderful embodiments of freedom in 
communication.

>>              you see, there is far more to be gained from widespread
>> encryption than is to be lost from it.
>
>Agreed.

actually, to tell you the truth I don't consider that a given. it is
very well possible that a huge advantage shifts to the terrorists of
the world. it very well may be!! but is anyone actually trying to
unbiasedly *answer* this question with honest research? of course
not. the NSA, the FBI, the whole law enforcement community is in
total CYA mode. we have Freeh actually utter at a press conference,
"would you feel the same about strong encryption if your daughter
was kidnapped by a pedophile?" or whatever his little @#$%^^&*
phrase was....anybody remember that slimy epithet of his?

for god's sake, could someone in the government do a study of 
what would *actually happen* if there was widespread encryption,
instead of letting the NSA's apparent default idea of "apocalypse now!!!" 
rule the whole debate?? the NSA is always talking about "the right
to communcation balanced with the needs of law enforcement", but have
they ever determined what in fact the costs are to society at large?
beyond simply ASSUMING that if a policeman complains that he can't
tap a phone line, that the world is really going to end tomorrow?!?!

has it ever occured to law enforcement agencies that widespread 
encryption may actually make their lives *easier*?? I could see a
situation where this is possible. the police routinely say, "sorry
ma'am we can't do anything because our hands are tied". if the police
and our government were prevented from any intervention into any
area involving cyberspace, perhaps both society and the police would
breath a lot easier!!

--Vlad Nuri