From: fc@all.net (Dr. Frederick B. Cohen)
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:30:58 +0800
To: jsw@netscape.com (Jeff Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Info on Netscape's key escrow position
In-Reply-To: <199512020701.XAA01919@ammodump.mcom.com>
Message-ID: <9512021318.AA27932@all.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


>   I had lunch with Jim Clark today, and explained the furor that was
> currently going on in cypherpunks and elsewhere.  After lunch he sent
> me the e-mail that I've attached below to pass along.  I think the gist
> of it is that if governments require key escrow, we will have to do it
> in order to sell our products with encryption into those countries.

The point Netscape seems to miss is that by refusing to go with weak
crypto and having the best product on the market, Netscape may be able
to force these governments into a position of accepting it.

Suppose Netscape took the position that it was 512 bit RSA, and that it
was for sale to anyone who wanted to buy it? The result would either be
a billion dollars of market impact and a collapse of the high-tech stock
bubble we are now building, or the government backing down.

If the US government backed down, and Netscape became the best product
around and maintained that lead for a long time, other countries would
either have to allow Netscape in, or suffer the consequences of falling
behind in the IT curve.

The right move for Netscape is to improve crypto-security, to refuse to
give in to government, and to publicly vilify the people in government
who stand in their way.  When billions of dollars are at stake and the
blame is placed squarely on the shoulders of a politician trying to
claim economic improvements based on their policies, the politician is
likely to yield.


-> See: Info-Sec Heaven at URL http://all.net/
Management Analytics - 216-686-0090 - PO Box 1480, Hudson, OH 44236