Return-Path: <sentto-279987-3053-1003367650-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com> Delivered-To: fc@all.net Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:17:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 20196 invoked by uid 510); 18 Oct 2001 01:15:23 -0000 Received: from n18.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.68) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 18 Oct 2001 01:15:23 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-3053-1003367650-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.4.53] by n18.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Oct 2001 01:14:11 -0000 X-Sender: fc@big.all.net X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 18 Oct 2001 01:14:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 62245 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2001 01:14:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Oct 2001 01:14:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Oct 2001 01:14:09 -0000 Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id SAA04819 for iwar@onelist.com; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:14:09 -0700 Message-Id: <200110180114.SAA04819@big.all.net> To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List) Organization: I'm not allowed to say X-Mailer: don't even ask X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net> X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Subject: [iwar] [fc:Senator.Backs.Off.Backdoors] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Senator Backs Off Backdoors By Declan McCullagh 2:00 a.m. Oct. 17, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- Sen. Judd Gregg has abruptly changed his mind and will no longer seek to insert backdoors into encryption products. A spokesman for the New Hampshire Republican said Tuesday that Gregg has "no intention" of introducing a bill to require government access to scrambled electronic or voice communications. "We are not working on an encryption bill and have no intention to," spokesman Brian Hart said in an interview. Two days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Gregg strode onto the Senate floor and called for a global prohibition on data-scrambling products without backdoors for government surveillance. Gregg said that quick action was necessary "to get the information that allows us to anticipate and prevent what occurred in New York and in Washington." A few days later, Gregg told the Associated Press that he was preparing legislation "to give our law enforcement community more tools" to unscramble messages in hopes of fighting terrorists. Gregg received support from defense hawks, conservative columnists and some newspapers, and even a poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates for Newsweek magazine. The poll asked: "Would you favor reducing encryption of communications to make it easier for the FBI and CIA to monitor the activities of suspected terrorists -- even if it might infringe on people's privacy and affect business practices?" Fifty-four percent of those polled answered "yes," and 72 percent said anti-encryption laws would be "somewhat" or "very" helpful in thwarting similar terrorist attacks. Complicating the debate were conflicting reports about whether the Internet-savvy terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon used encryption. Citing unnamed sources, Reuters reported "the hijackers did not use encryption," while WorldNetDaily claimed they did. "There will be some point in the future where a criminal or terrorist uses encryption to pull off a horrific crime," says Mike Godwin, a policy fellow with the Center for Democracy and Technology. "What we have to ultimately recognize is that we're safer from those criminals if we have those encryption tools than we would be if we didn't have them." In response to then-FBI director Louis Freeh's entreaties, a House committee in 1997 approved a bill that would have banned the manufacture, distribution or import of any encryption product that did not include a backdoor for the federal government. The full House never voted on that measure. Many cryptographers and legal scholars believed that following a catastrophic terrorist attack, the U.S. Congress would move swiftly to impose backdoors on anyone manufacturing or distributing encryption products -- a requirement that would not only hamstring American firms, but wreak havoc in the open-source world. In a 1995 law review article, University of Miami law professor Michael Froomkin foresaw that possibility. He wrote: "In the wake of a great crime, perhaps by terrorists or drug cartels -- the detection of which could plausibly have been frustrated by encryption -- that which today looks clearly unconstitutional might unfortunately appear more palatable." "I've never been happier to be wrong," Froomkin said Tuesday. Froomkin said there may be a greater awareness among politicians of encryption's double-edged sword: It can cloak the communications of criminals, but shield the Internet from miscreants. "I think if they put a crypto provision in this bill, it would have passed," Froomkin said. "Look at what the administration got." Froomkin was talking about additional eavesdropping and surveillance powers requested by the Bush administration, which the Senate and the House overwhelmingly voted for last week. That bill is called the USA Act (PDF). After Gregg's floor speech following the Sept. 11 attacks, crypto-buffs mobilized to oppose laws limiting encryption. Rob Carlson, who organized an emergency meeting of activists the following weekend at the University of Maryland, said he's relieved to hear Gregg appears to have changed his mind. "I'm glad to hear it's gone. Whether or not it's true is another matter," Carlson said. "(Gregg) said he was definitely supporting it. Now he says he's definitely not. Maybe he'll say he's definitely supporting it again." Ben Polen contributed to this report. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Pinpoint the right security solution for your company- Learn how to add 128- bit encryption and to authenticate your web site with VeriSign's FREE guide! http://us.click.yahoo.com/yQix2C/33_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:55 PST