From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 12:55:48 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: US Info Supremacy
Message-ID: <199701252055.MAA02667@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>From Financial Times 26 January:

"Defence experts in both the US and western Europe
have commented recently that the US forces' lead in
information technology is growing to the point where
Washington may question the military usefulness of
allies."

Pointers to these comments would be appreciated.

Further, if the speculation of US supremacist go-it-alone
policy is correct, how might this affect:

1. US crypto export policy.

2. Crypto czar Aarons' role in promoting global GAK.

3. Other nation's suspicion of the US and its technological
prowess, caused, for example, by the NSA's avowed intention 
to surveil all the world's communcation, and if encrypted to 
crack it at any cost.

4. Increasing isolation of the US from foreign innovation 
and talent -- the imperialist incest decline.

5. The future of treaties such as US/UK/AUS, NATO, SEATO,
and the like for intel-sharing and crypto control.

Two observations:

One, last year's NRC crypto report said that strong crypto should not be 
a problem, and that other, unidentified, technologies should 
be supported instead to assure domestic and national security.

Two, the recent InfoWar-Defense report has been criticized as unduly
alarmist, because the US has sufficient means (Perry and others 
claim) to protect against information attacks. One NCSC commentator 
on talk.politics.crypto said that the IW-D techie panelists were out of 
touch, unlike Stewart Baker, a lawyer!

Hence, it might be worth considering that both the NRC report and
the IW-D reports are diversionary, disinformation to conceal US
true capabilities -- strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, the crypto 
debate itself might be diversionary from other more crucial information 
defense technology -- for surveilling, sifting, interpreting, analyzing, 
decrypting, mining and securely storing. As well as offensive means 
to counterattack US communications attackers.

Or, turning the matter one more time, perhaps crypto is in fact the heart 
of the national security problem and the avowed other, unidentified, more
crucial, technology is a sham to mislead about US and other government's
true weaknesses. The Commerce Control List is almost incoherent in
trying to definitively regulate advancing technology.

Paranoia may be increasing among governments due to the crypto debate
and related issues of information security, such that each may, like the
US is allegedly doing, retreating to within its own technological borders, while
at the same time engaging in PsyWar about threats, defenses and offenses.

Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons.