[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Leahy's Crypto Wake-up Call
In <[email protected]>, on 04/05/98
at 11:26 PM, Bill Stewart <[email protected]> said:
>>> Third, legislation should establish both procedures and
>>>standards for access by law enforcement to decryption keys
>>>or decryption assistance for both encrypted communications
>>>and stored electronic information and only permit such access upon court
>>>order authorization, with appropriate notice and other procedural
>>>safeguards;
>>
>>And just *how* do they plan on doing this without either backdoors or
>>escrow??
>Easy, Constitutional, and doesn't need any new legislation - all you
>need is a warrant or subpoena to tell anybody to produce those records
>and materials they have.
>If they didn't save a recording of their telephone call or email, or
>think the Fifth Amendment reasonably prohibits them
>from being compelled to incriminate themselves,
>then the prosecution doesn't get anything. No problem,
>and it's worked quite well for 200+ years.
Well call me a cynic but in reading section #3 I take that as to mean
access without the help or cooperation of the person(s) who did the
encryption.
If they are willing to rely on the Constitution then why push for new, and
as you mentioned, unneeded legislation?
I think the rest of this is just window dressing for organizations like
the EFF, et al who are just bursting to make a deal.
I smell a lawyer in the woodpile.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0
Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/esecure.html
---------------------------------------------------------------