From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka@lsil.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 20:58:36 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: Gore, Others on Crypto Policy
In-Reply-To: <199809162314.TAA00055@camel14.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <36006D6A.15DF@lsil.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> Not a word about backdoors, TA, DIRT, keyboard snooping, covert
> chip features, compromising emanations, national technical means,
> just assurances that the plan satisfies the interests of the protectors.
>
They sound too satisfied; as if they don't really need domestic controls
anymore. I see the references to Cisco and the promotion of GAK. I
choose "d) All of the above." Have they been hanging around Intel, Sun
and Microsoft lately?

I expect also that some key congresspeople have signed up. The recent
embassy events may have eased their minds about the Constitution. Isn't
this technique referred to as the "We'd have to kill you if we told you
but if only you knew what we know..." routine? We can expect some sort
of suspension-of-the-Bill-of-Rights-if-crypto-is-involved laws to begin
their journey next year. You're free to use any crypto you want to but
if we say 'give us the key' you'll be in jail until you do, 1st, 4th and
5th be damned. Isn't that more or less the case with controlled
substances?

Need a clean machine and an on-line machine now. Copper room. Sneakernet
between the two. 
What is 'TA'?
What is 'National Technical Means'?

Mike