From: Lizard <lizard@dnai.com>
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: c7395ae72ac568eae482c402249c99116b0f9a74cc6365dc272d7a722815f7e3
Message ID: <3.0.3.32.19970925110022.031567f4@dnai.com>
Reply To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970925120717.17603A-100000@vorlon.mit.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-25 18:25:42 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 02:25:42 +0800
From: Lizard <lizard@dnai.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 02:25:42 +0800
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Why the White amendment is a good idea (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970925120717.17603A-100000@vorlon.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19970925110022.031567f4@dnai.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
At 10:33 AM 9/25/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>Once the NETCenter failed to decypt the first several dozen
instances of
>PGP or 3DES thrust before it, I rather expect enthusiasm will wane.
But it doesn't have to decrypt it. It has to tell the cops:
"OK, you need to send a guy in there when he's not home and look for
a file called 'mykey.gkr' on his computer...it will probably be in
c:\pgp. Then you need to plant a video camera to watch him type his
passphrase. Then we can read his mail, no sweat."
I don't know why I keep making this point, but the weak point in
crypto is NOT the length of the key, it's the human factor. Go after
the HUMAN USING THE CRYPTO via traditional spy/police methods, and
smeg the key length.
But to do that, you see, you'll need warrents, reasons for
suspiscion, and, becuase of the effort involved, you'll only do it
for serious crimes with a strong liklihood of conviction. *That* is
the 'stauts quo' law enforcement *claims* to want.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBNCqmtTKf8mIpTvjWEQKP2QCg23fm4sNAs0Uj9d2DZT/60ZRWgeIAoI37
/RgFkiiCHHo10o2/8yiBTj+i
=af7a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Return to September 1997
Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”