From: declan@hotwired.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:07:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: HotWired: Crypto Switch in DC
Message-ID: <v0151010aadf7bb1cab7b@[204.62.128.229]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


http://www.hotwired.com/netizen/

Crypto Switch?

By Brock N. Meeks
Washington, DC, 26 June 1996

   Advocates for the use of encryption free of government mandates
   packed a Senate hearing room to overflowing today in support of a
   pro-encryption bill. But as no detractors were asked to testify at the
   hearing, this was all preaching to the crypto choir.

   What even the preachers and choir are unaware of, however, is that a
   senior White House official is quietly trying to turn the
   administration away from its lock-step allegiance to the FBI and
   National Security Agency rhetoric of "strong crypto bad; key escrow
   good."

   This official told Dispatch: "I'm hoping to develop a [consensus
   movement] inside the administration that will stand up to some of the
   [law enforcement and intelligence agency] interests" on encryption.
   "We haven't found the right encryption policy yet," the official
   noted.

   Here, for the first time, there's real hope that the administration
   can be swayed from its wholesale support for the key-escrow encryption
   scheme. "The government moves on its own," the White House source
   said. There are "shifting sands on things ... policies change," and
   there's the "potential that the administration's position will change
   over time."

   So what we have, of course, is the classic Washington public-private
   squeeze play: Push an issue in public, and push even harder in
   private.

   Today, the Senate's newest wired member and the chairman of the Senate
   Science Subcommittee hearing, Conrad Burns (R-Montana), welcomed
   testimony from crypto experts in support of his previously introduced
   pro-encryption bill, the Commerce Online in the Digital Era Act of
   1996, dubbed "Pro-CODE." Burns called the hearing a historic event in
   that it was the first time a Senate hearing had been wired to the Net.

   Several senators knocked the White House for supporting encryption
   policies that essentially hogtie US businesses, locking them out of a
   lucrative international market. Others made reference to potential
   dangers of empowering government agencies, such as the FBI, with the
   ready ability to snoop on the private speech of citizens.

   Senator John Ashcroft (R-Missouri) noted how the "events of the this
   last week or two" - namely, the political flap resulting from the
   White House inspection of FBI background files - "brings into sharp
   focus" the need to assure Americans that their private speech won't be
   compromised. "I want to be sure we don't forfeit what it means to be
   an American citizen," Ashcroft said.

   Jerry Berman, executive director of the Center for Democracy and
   Technology, put a finer point on the issue: "We don't want the
   Internet to become the ultimate FBI background file on everyone."

   Although the panelists admitted that law enforcement has a legitimate
   concern about criminals being able to use encryption techniques to
   subvert investigations, they also noted that such concerns had to be
   balanced with constitutional rights.

   Marc Rotenberg, executive director for the Electronic Privacy
   Information Center, responding to a question about whether "secret
   speech" should be given the same protection as public speech, said
   that there's no doubt that encrypted speech should be awarded the same
   protection as public speech. However, Rotenburg cautioned, "the courts
   have to be educated first," as they were during the recent case in
   which the Communications Decency Act was deemed unconstitutional.

   And so went the show. No fireworks; then again, none were expected.

   And while the hearing finally allowed the pro-crypto camp a chance to
   spout off to Congress, it was really only a steppingstone to future
   efforts. The reason? Even the hard-core crypto advocates privately
   admit that this legislation doesn't have a prayer of passing, given a
   cramped legislative calendar and election-year rhetoric.

###