Re: The GAK Momentum is Building...

[Declan McCullagh <declan@eff.org>]

On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

> [business key management plans/infrastructures]
> >However, making the government a _required_ part of such plans implies a
> >motive that is not at all the same as what companies wish (mostly, disaster
> >recovery).
> 
> the distinction lies in the terminology. what does it mean, "required
> part of the plan". if it essentially amounts to nothing more than 
> the government saying, "you must give us keys when we present you
> with a subpoena/warrant", then that's no different than the system
> we have today. again, granted, laws specifically aimed at crypto
> can tend to take up a life off their own. but my main point was
> that the gloom-and-doom peddled by you and lucky green over clipper
> just doesn't mesh with the actual events. the government has 
> visibly had to *backpeddle* *numerous* times in all of its 
> clipper proposals. I see no evidence that the latest proposals
> are going to be any different. what annoys me is people who are
> crying wolf all the time, and even when it seems there are no
> wolves around, or they have temporarily receded,
> they say, "I told you so". "the wolves really are going to
> devour you, just you wait and see"

Perhaps I'm missing something here. If a key recovery infrastructure is 
required, let it develop free of government coercion and intervention. 
Let the free market develop it. If the KRI is indeed free, the Feds won't 
have any problems with us escrowing keys in Switzerland or Belize, will they?

The White House is not backpedaling as much as trying other attacks. 
Like having Clinton call wavering Democratic senators on Senate Commerce 
and reminding them of their political obligations to him in an election year.
And like the government-mandated key recovery infrastructure.

The fight is anything but over.

-Declan


// declan@eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan@well.com //