From: landon dyer <landon@best.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 22:57:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: feinstein and domestic crypto curbs
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971210063909.00a3cdd0@shell9.ba.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




  here's the text of a letter that i snail-mailed to california's
senator dianne feinstein in early september:


----------------

Landon Dyer						September 8, 1997
Campbell, CA


Senator Dianne Feinstein
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510


Dear Senator Feinstein,

I am writing this to you because of some statements you made last
week in a Senate Judiciary committee on the subject of mandatory key
escrow for domestic encryption products.

To be frank: I was shocked and sickened by your statement that
"nothing other than some form of mandatory key recovery really does
the job" of preventing crime.

I urge you to seek out experts in industry and talk to them about why
this approach is fundamentally unworkable.  I urge you to re-read
1984.  I urge you to remember the abuses of the Hoover FBI.

Mandatory key escrow is extremely dangerous stuff.  I do not believe
the government should have this power because of the enormous
potential and temptation for its abuse. (Corruption does happen.
Remember the case in California recently where DMV employees were
selling driver's license information to supermarkets?). And any
repository of escrowed keys would be a very attractive target for
break-ins

Mandatory key escrow would cripple important parts of our nation's
software industry.  Why should we do this just to make law
enforcement's job a little easier?

Americans need better, more ubiquitous encryption, not less, to
protect us from crime.  We don't need Big Brother, and that's exactly
what mandatory escrow would give us.


Sincerely,

Landon Dyer
Sr. Software Engineer


----------------


  here's feinstein's reply, which i received a couple of days
ago.  i've transcribed it pretty carefully, and left the typos
intact with [sic], any other typos are mine:


----------------

				October 23, 1997

Dear Mr. Dyer:

  Thank you for contacting me regarding federal encryption
policy.  I appreciate your taking the time to write to me on this
issues [sic].  It is important for me to hear from my California
constituents as this debate continues.

  As you know, numerous legislative proposals have been put
forth to amend or restructure encryption controls.  Cryptographic,
or encryption, software uses complex algorithms to scramble
information, thus providing greater privacy for the information.

  I read your recent letter on encryption and believe that the
attached San Jose Mercury News interview correctly states my
views.  As we both know, this is a complicated and difficult
issue which affects many California constituencies.  I am open to
suggestions as to how vital privacy rights and public safety
needs can be supported and protected.

  I value your opinion and appreciate you actively
contributing to this legislative discusstion.  As Congress
proceeds to debate various encryption proposals, I look forward
to a thorough review of this issue.  While I want to promote
business opportunity for U.S. firms I do not want to do so at the
expense of law enforcement.

  Once again, thank you your [sic] correspondence.  I hope that you
will continue to share your thoughts and ideas with me.  If I can
be of further assistance, please to not hesitate to contact my
Washington, D.C. office at 202/224-3841

  With warmest personal regards,

		Sincerely yours,

		(signed) Dianne Feinstein


Enclosure

 [enclosed: the 15-Sep-97 SJ Merc article on D.F.'s crypto curb support]


--------------

  nothing terribly surprising, really -- i wasn't expecting any
response at all, though


-landon