From: “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
To: hoz@univel.telescan.com
Message Hash: fea77edc0ffcec9d83535b9423f5721b4907f136e7db39f3f2e3c978e0d64213
Message ID: <01I434LP0CLS8Y53B6@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-29 07:04:00 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 15:04:00 +0800
From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 15:04:00 +0800
To: hoz@univel.telescan.com
Subject: Re: Book: The President's Eyes Only
Message-ID: <01I434LP0CLS8Y53B6@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
From: IN%"hoz@univel.telescan.com" 28-APR-1996 13:57:13.98
>The cypherpunks relevance (Besides the David Kahn quote) is
>the frequent mention of NSA decrypts and SIGINT. The frequency
>that nations and individuals have used (and apparently continue
>to use) breakable encryption is incredible. The intelligence
>that has been derived by breaking them is worth a great deal,
>in dollars and maybe lives. This book has made me understand a
>bit, why a government might try to limit strong cryptography.
But do keep in mind that it's not just the US government that can
decrypt weak cryptography. So can a lot of other governments... including ones
like France and Japan that engage in a lot of commercial espionage. And ITAR
restrictions have hindered the use of cryptography in the US by limiting the
market for products.
As has been said on here in the past, there are probably several
groups within the NSA. Some think that getting the info is more important
than protecting US citizens from having _their_ info stolen. Some think the
reverse. And the ones in the NSA (and the rest of the US government) with
darker motives (power et al) are going to be in the first group - they're not
concerned with effects on US citizens.
-Allen
Return to April 1996
Return to ““E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>”
1996-04-29 (Mon, 29 Apr 1996 15:04:00 +0800) - Re: Book: The President’s Eyes Only - “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>