From: Will Day <willday@rom.oit.gatech.edu>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 04:01:51 +0800
To: fstuart@vetmed.auburn.edu (Frank Stuart)
Subject: Re: Hackers invade DOJ web site
In-Reply-To: <199608180942.EAA08054@snoopy.vetmed.auburn.edu>
Message-ID: <199608201554.LAA04383@rom.oit.gatech.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

A short time ago, at a computer terminal far, far away, Frank Stuart wrote:
>however, I think those in a position to do so should start with the spin
>control.  Some suggestions:
>
>   The fact that even the U.S. Justice Department is unable to adequately
>   protect it's own site from intruders underscores the need for widely-
>   available strong encryption.
>
>   While this is certainly a major embarrassment for the Justice Department,
>   at least the mandatory "key escrow" program the Clinton administration is
>   insisting upon has not yet been implemented; no private citizens' data
>   appears to have been compromised this time.
>
>   It's doubtful that a new law or government bureaucracy would have prevented
>   this from happening but it's entirely possible that tools such as strong
>   encryption could have.  It's ironic that the U.S. Government is focusing on
>   the former while fighting use of the latter.

I understand how it affects their claim for the security of escrowed
keys, but I'm afraid I don't follow the other argument.  How would the
wide availability of strong encryption have helped prevent the breakin?
How would encryption in general prevent breakins?  I'd love to use this
as an argument for strong encryption, but I don't see how it really
applies.

===
Will Day       <PGP mail preferred>           *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
willday@rom.oit.gatech.edu                      HARRY BROWNE FOR PRESIDENT
http://rom.oit.gatech.edu/~willday/            http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/
OIT, Georgia Tech, Atlanta 30332-0715         *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
  =->  Opinions expressed are mine alone and do not reflect OIT policy  <-=

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMhnfhRDHlOdPw2ZdAQHIagQAktlsSEN4Ojt54JwZqWIujZ3BDc9n8e5D
tokubxvVSdMyh9v/xVhVBfIOne1/+htiMdTWHYch0ZrJGqPR3rbicnuVm57Qq964
KMR9E3P9jNBgo+V9J3V01GcT3+VzxyOMTKqq64fLlRDnF1dg+UNWfCxNYc3bQnw+
HvYOMUv8mqs=
=k72n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----