1996-01-24 - Re: NSA says strong crypto to china??

Header Data

From: “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
To: perry@piermont.com
Message Hash: 8a0393254f2573889094912c7cb27b3be777f10b9eeaac2e2fe2e722bb1fa932
Message ID: <01I0E49IAYZGA0UM4U@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-01-24 20:43:32 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 04:43:32 +0800

Raw message

From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 04:43:32 +0800
To: perry@piermont.com
Subject: Re: NSA says strong crypto to china??
Message-ID: <01I0E49IAYZGA0UM4U@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	IN%"perry@piermont.com"  9-JAN-1996 12:05:32.69

Alex Strasheim writes:
> If this is true, it's great news.  It would mean that the NSA is adopting
> both cypherpunk analysis and tactics.  Who would have thought?  An NSA 
> remade in Tim May's image.

I suspect that the NSA was thinking in our terms long before many of
us were aware of cryptography. I actually think that in many cases,
their behavior is perfectly rational. Their goals are merely
different. If you are in SIGINT, I believe that the possibility of
totally losing a valued intelligence tool must heavily weigh on your
mind. Of course, they are hardly monolithic, and different groups at
the NSA necessarily have different goals.

Once SIGINT becomes much harder regardless of their previous attempts
to stop it, I suspect that the NSA will become a friend and not an
impediment. By that time, of course, the "we have to protect our
people" types will be the only ones producing results and getting
funding, and the "we have to gather information" types will have long
ceased to produce. Thats probably a decade or more off, though.
---------------
	I suspect that the NSA can basically be divided into four groups:
	A. Those who are interested in protecting American individual
liberties, and are thus (possibly potential) allies. This bunch may have a
subgroup of those who already are allies, who have unfortunately been rather
unsuccessful (or perhaps we simply haven't seen their successes).
	B. Those who realize about the potentials for individual liberty from
cryptography, but believe that something else about America is more important.
For instance, they may believe that the voters in a democracy should be able to
institute whatever rules they like. Various left- and right-wing viewpoints
are also possible here; the former would include worrying about lost tax
dollars because of wanting big government, the latter would include concerns
about pornography, etcetera.
	C. Those who are in the NSA because they want power, and strong
cryptography's dissemination would hinder this. This group is likely to be
concealed as one of the other groups.
	D. Those who haven't thought about it, and are simply following orders.
I suspect that this is the largest group; while the overall level of intellect
at the NSA may be higher than in the average population, the intelligence
mindset of "need to know" may be keeping many people from realizing everything
the NSA is doing.
	-Allen





Thread