From: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
To: Bert-Jaap Koops <E.J.Koops@kub.nl>
Message Hash: 839de6ae55410ed32aeca5242719983dd5cc8046340636bc45b62ddd83d56de2
Message ID: <3267B7DA.7D5F@gte.net>
Reply To: <809F2C77EB0@frw3.kub.nl>
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-19 21:39:54 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 14:39:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 14:39:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: Bert-Jaap Koops <E.J.Koops@kub.nl>
Subject: Re: Comments on binding cryptography (1)
In-Reply-To: <809F2C77EB0@frw3.kub.nl>
Message-ID: <3267B7DA.7D5F@gte.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Bert-Jaap Koops wrote:
> Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net> wrote:
[snip]
> > So where in the U.S. are you gonna get TRP's who will not *ever*
> > "leak" your files to an interested agency without proper warrant?
> [and]
> > They sure as hell don't trust us, now do they?
> This indicates exactly our difference of opinion, which I noticed
> already in my posting. We have different views on governments, so be
> it.
[snip]
> If you can tell me exactly how criminals can get around the
> cryptographic protocol in the way the proposal tries to prevent
> (unilateral fraud), I very much would like to hear so. If you mean
> criminals can agree to use superencryption (or PGP for that matter),
> I don't deny that, as you might have noticed.
So Bert, let's just call a spade a spade, eh? Since you readily agree
that organized criminals probably won't use binding crypto, and that
TRP's will probably leak our info to spy "agencies" and so on, then that
would make your system yet another of those programs that can't monitor
organized crime directly, but instead harasses non-criminal citizens in
the hope that the agencies can eventually get to the criminals via an
indirect connection, i.e., the citizen happens to buy something at a web
site run by Crime, Inc. (assuming that Crime, Inc. is not in fact just
another agency-run sting operation).
As far as fraud is concerned, my main concern is that important (or any)
documents etc. are not forged, including my personal communications.
This is particularly important to prevent frame-ups, which run rampant
in the U.S. I suppose they don't frame people in your country. Well,
it's public knowledge that the Justice Dept. does this sort of thing
here, so knowing that, are you still suggesting we trust them, simply
because you trust your government? Or are you suggesting that with all
of this new technology, that the U.S. Justice Dept. will evolve into a
more ethical agency like your govt. allegedly has, instead of the other
way around?
Return to October 1996
Return to “Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>”