From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 17:52:05 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: OECD on Crypto
Message-ID: <199606070342.UAA20358@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 10:22 AM 6/5/96 -0700, Mixmaster wrote:

>OECD NEWS RELEASE - Paris, 10 May 1996 
>
>OECD EXPERTS BEGIN DRAFTING CRYPTOGRAPHY GUIDELINES 
>
>Cryptography experts from OECD countries have begun drafting a
>proposal for OECD Cryptography Policy Guidelines that governments can
>use as a guide to formulate their national policies on encryption. 
>
>Many governments are under pressure within their own countries to
>develop a national position on cryptography, 

This is bullshit.  If anything, it's exactly the opposite:  It is the 
GOVERNMENTS and those who hold government jobs who are doing the 
"pressuring."    I haven't seen more than a trickle of desire for a 
"national position on cryptography."  What Internet-people want is the 
ELIMINATION of a "national position on cryptography," I think.

>which is used in computer
>technology to protect everything from product designs to health and
>tax records and global correspondence. But the needs of global
>technologies and applications require an international --rather than a
>strictly national -- approach to policymaking.

In other words, various Constitutions are getting in the way!  Tough!

> The fast-paced
>development of the Global Information Infrastructure adds an element
>of urgency.

In other words, the governments are feeling that the situation is getting 
out of their control!  Excellent, that's progress.

>
>The business community, individuals and national security and law enforcement
>agencies are all pressing for encryption guidelines

BULL!  The businesses are saying, "Don't restrict crypto."  The individuals 
are saying, "Don't restrict crypto!"  

So-called "law enforcement" agencies are saying, "We're losing control of 
the public!  Where's '1984' when we need it!"


> and the OECD will strive to
>reflect the legitimate interests of all these groups as it drafts Guidelines. 

I don't think so.


>The private sector is closely involved in drafting the Guidelines,
>with business representatives from the Business and Industry Advisory
>Committee (BIAC) participating at the meeting. 

Gee, what about THE INDIVIDUALS?  You know, the ones you steal your tax 
money from?  That's right, the peons.


>The OECD meeting, which took place on 8 May, was hosted by the US
>Department of State in Washington DC.

That's because the USG is the most unhappy, because its Constitution is 
making it very difficult to ban crypto.

 It was held immediately after a
>Second Business Government Forum on Global Cryptography Policy in
>Washington DC on 7 May, which was cosponsored by the OECD, the 
>International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the Business and Industry Advisory
>Committee (BIAC) to the OECD.

It probably had a similar lack of participation by ordinary citizens and 
netizens.  Do I detect a pattern here?

> Two similar conferences took place in Paris in
>December, when OECD countries and business representatives met for the
>first time to discuss international cryptography policy. 

Probably because they had gotten wind a few months before of a serious 
potential danger to the continued hegemony of governments over the people.

>
>The process of drafting the OECD Cryptography Policy Guidelines will
>continue at an experts meeting in June and is due for completion in
>early 1997.

It's already too late!


>For further information, please contact Ms. Hiroko Kamata, OECD 
>Directorate for Science, 
>Technology and Industry (tel. 331 45 24 80 04 - fax. 331 45 24 93 32 - 
>e-mail. hiroko.kamata@oecd.org).

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com