Re: GAK 4 -- For whom the Doorbell tolls

[Charlie_Kaufman@iris.com]

I believe there is nothing really good, really evil, or even really novel
about the Cisco et al proposal. That makes it hard for a technical
community like this one to evaluate it.

The controversy should not be around the technology, but around the
spin-doctoring. It is both wrong and dangerous to portray this as a step
forward in resolving the crypto export debate. It is comparable to the
Lotus Notes 64/40 encryption scheme or the Microsoft/Netscape and later
Lotus scheme for making strong cryptography available between exportable
browsers and international banks. These may be significant to some
customers and to some vendors, but they are not steps toward resolving the
controversy. They are more likely to extend the controversy, since they
decrease the urgency of the debate for some of the players.

There is no reason to believe this controversy will be settled anytime
soon. The battle continues with no plausible resolution because both sides
believe they will win if they hold out long enough. Civil Libertarians
believe that the public will not stand for the sorts of draconian controls
that will be necessary to enable universal snooping and that the courts
will rule such controls unconstitutional. The argument against this view is
that the American people are sheep and the Constitution says what the
Supreme Court says it does and have you looked at the makeup of the Supreme
Court lately? Big Brother thinks he will win because he has the pictures.
And because he always does.

So think of these confusing technological tweaks as sending food aid to the
starving peasants in the war zone. It might extend the war by masking some
of its most painful effects, and hence might in the long run be a bad
thing. But the effect is ambiguous at worst, and it's difficult to argue
with the humanitarian groups that want to do it.

I was involved with choosing the wording of the Lotus press release around
64/40. It was a constant effort to restrain the enthusiasm of the
marketeers who wanted to talk about how wonderful it was. I think we
overall did a good job of making it clear that this was not a great thing,
and that we hoped it would not be a long term thing. It was a small
improvement for a limited set of customers while we continued the war.

If you read Cisco's publications, they have been fairly restrained in their
enthusiasm. But some of their partners and some of the press coverage has
gotten completely out of hand. The most offensive testimonial is from
Novell:

"This solution represents a real step forward for U.S. encryption policy,"
said Eric Schmidt, CEO of Novell. "At last, we have a market solution that
meets the needs of consumers, corporations, law enforcement and national
security."

This seems like a case where we need to shoot the messenger.

     --Charlie Kaufman