[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NSA Realists v. Nuts (Was: Re: Crypto APIs)
Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>The real problem with the NSA is the same as the problem with the FBI
>re: digital telephony. They've gotten used to a certain model of how
>the world works and rather than adapt to new times where most people
>have access to strong crypto, they have decided to use the laws to try
>to retard the inevitable.
Perry is absolutely right about this. We have been living in a "golden era"
for the FBI and NSA. By analogy, we have also been living in a golden era
for physicians: during the last several decades (in the developed world
anyway) we have relied on antibiotics to the point where they are taken for
granted. This time has passed, and there is no going back. The Golden Age
of Antibiotics is over.
Similarly, the Golden Age of Wiretaps is over. No amount of wishful
thinking and convoluted logic can put the genie back into the bottle. An
attempt to (in effect) make certain types of mathematics illegal will only
serve to knock us out of our technological leadership position, not make our
country safe from terrorism and drugs. Given a world in which strong crypto
is actually used, and that use is illegal, how can a government make the
punishment fit the crime? Would all use of illegal cryptography be treated
as though there was an actual threat of terrorism? The death penalty? This
is, of course, an absurd point of view. The government could no more
accomplish this than they could make muttering over the phone (thereby
defeating a plaintext wiretap), or the use of obscure language (such as
Native American dialects) illegal. It just doesn't hang together as a
Like physicians, the FBI and the national security operations must devise
alternative schemes to combat the real "enemy," terrorists and drug dealers
-- not mathematicians and ordinary citizens trying to have a private
conversation. The suppression of basic rights that would be required in any
attempt to overcome the "force of nature" that is human knowledge would make
a mockery of our "inalienable rights" as free people to conduct our lives
without fear of the overbearing scrutiny of unrestrained government.