Let's see here ...

[fergp@sytex.com (Paul Ferguson)]

Once again, I pull together my collective thoughts (that _was_
rather difficult) and send them along for the remainder of the
cypherpunks to ponder.
 
It would appear that several things have happened; let's see if I can
summarize -
 
- The Clinton administration was presented with a golly-gee proposal
from either the NSA or the NIST (probably both) on a way to "offer"
public encryption. ('Nuf said.)
 
- From what we have surmised (researched, hypothesized and down-right
taken for face value), the government (whether it be the NIST or
whomever) has obviously been working on this "technology" for a few
years. Albeit, their negligence to inform anyone.
 
- Mr. Clinton and crew obligingly acknowledge this new, technological
wonder, and think that they're doing us all a favor.
 
- Enter the "Clipper Chip", and all it's fanfare.
 
Okay. I took The Dark One's advice (not that I needed the prodding,
mind you) and faxed every one of the contacts on the list that he
posted earlier (a couple of which were voice numbers, BTW). The big
three (ABC, NBC and CBS + CNN) got my fax and my thoughts on the
subject. I'm mad as hell, too -- yet I'm more prone to bringing this
highly volatile subject (it would seem that it's only an explosive
situation to those of us who understand it's implications) into the
public eye. Let's put this topic into proper prospective -- for the
layman, for the "man in the streets."
 
Let me try to put this into prospective for some of our less
politically inclined participants.
 
For those of you who live within earshot of the "Beltway", you are
probably familiar with the G. Gordon Liddy radio show. Well, to make a
long story short, one afternoon the topic was computer crime. A young
man called in to express  his concern with the topic of "underground"
computer virus distribution and all that rot. He was talking on a deaf
ear, folks. The program was dominated by yuppies, calling in worried
about their precious credit records and how they could possibly be
disclosed or damaged by the computer criminals. I turned off the show
in disgust at that point, but the point is this: No matter how hard
you attempt to bring matters into the light that the _computer_ public
should be concerned about, they revert into their own realm of
protected computerdom. This is an observation, not a conviction.
 
What we need to do, is to make folks understand that this is not just
a computer issue -- it's privacy issue, for cryin' out loud! If the
techno-fascists within certain levels of government service think that
they can _impose_ their will on the computer community at large, they
are most definately ill-informed.  Most would probably think that they
could fluff this little tidbit of "legislation" into reality.
 
Bottom line: I stand by the ideals that we have every right, as common
citizens, to encrypt and cipher as we see fit. Legality be damned.
(This is not a legality issue, for christ's sake!) This is an issue
where the government is playing bully and we find ourselves on the
receiving end of their quest for superiority.
 
I urge each and every one of you to take the time to write your
congressman, fax the closest televison or radio station and make this
topic as public as possible!
 
I refuse to be treated like a criminal because I desire electronic
privacy.
 
Say "No".
 
Cheers.
 
Oh. By the way, I'm looking for some kind sort to offer an avenue to
place Legal Net News on an archive site on a regular basis. I find it
extremely difficult to meet subscription requests and would prefer to
offer this compilation as an anon FTP'able newsletter. Any takers?
Issue 2 has bee released, which covers our recent travails ....
 

Paul Ferguson                    |  Uncle Sam wants to read
Network Integration Consultant   |       your e-mail...
Alexandria, Virginia USA         | Just say "NO" to the Clipper
fergp@sytex.com                  |          Chip...