[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

No Subject

Subject: Re: BOYCOTT AT&T
Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 20:07:37 -0400
Reply-To: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Lines: 40

> sure it didn't hurt.  In the May 13 New York Times:
>      >The AT&T Corporation's winning bid for a $4 billion contract to
>      >modernize Saudi Arabia's phone system ,WHICH HAD BEEN SUPPORTED
>      >millions of dollars higher than other bids [...] The huge-scale

In a column written for the Toronto Sun today, former Canadian Defense
Minister Perrin Beatty went on record as opposing the Clipper chip.
His reasoning:

"1) American policy can't apply around the world, and foreign companies
    will build equipment without the chip. Criminals will have ready
    access to scramblers without trap doors.

 2) The code the chip inserts makes it easier to identify information
    from a particular source. Instead of simply being part of a
    computerized stew, each piece of data is more recognizable and can
    be readily decrypted by the electronic key.

 3) If Canadian industry must include the chip in products sold in the
    U.S. and Canada, it will lose business to less buggable equipment
    from Asia or Europe.

 4) The chip could open our diplomatic and commercial secrets to U.S.
    snooping. The Americans are our best friends and our interests are
    usually similar. But shouldn't we at least be cautious?

 5) The requirement for a court order is fine if procedures are followed
    and no one breaches security, but what if the system breaks down?
    Should we rely on only one means of protection?"


My comments: Canada used to have that Saudi Arabia contract, so there
may be some economics involved. On the other hand, Mr. Beatty is
especially well informed and has shown an interest in privacy issues
for some time.

Alex Brock