From: Jim Gillogly <jim@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 95 05:36:37 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: FBI intentions [Re: Where is text of wiretap bill]
In-Reply-To: <951006.165006.5n9.rnr.w165w@cybrspc.mn.org>
Message-ID: <199510071236.FAA05136@mycroft.rand.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> In list.cypherpunks, jim@acm.org writes:

>> An assistant director of the FBI, William Baugh, spoke recently at the ICI
>> conference in DC.  He said he hoped American industry would be cooperative
>> in making the voluntary compliance with TESSERA or other GAK widespread,
>> because if it doesn't happen then they would need to come back and get
>> more Congressional action, and "we found the coercive solution we had to
>> use for Digital Telephony very draining."

> roy@cybrspc.mn.org (Roy M. Silvernail) writes:

> I shouldn't be surprised to see this, but it does strike me as pretty
> blatant.  Aren't the Fibbies supposed to be putting a less threatening
> spin on this stuff?  Or are the gloves coming off?

The latter, assuming the gloves were ever on.  In the previous day's
presentations at the ICI conference, FBI Dir. Freeh spoke about the need
for the FBI to get not only decryptable wiretaps but also decryptable
files, and pointed out that some of the proposals about limited-duration
keys would not let them decrypt files they seized with a legal warrant if
those files had been encrypted earlier than the warrant date.  He took Q&A
for a while, and I got to ask the first Q:

Q: Does the Bureau favor making escrowed keys mandatory for domestic
   encryption?
A: Not at this time.  We hope that voluntary compliance and cooperation
   from industry will result in companies developing a single system for
   export and for domestic use.  If this does not happen, then we will
   need to take further action.

	Jim Gillogly
	16 Winterfilth S.R. 1995, 12:33