Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?

[jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>]

At 08:56 PM 3/30/96 -0500, Black Unicorn wrote:

>> Actually, he doesn't know this.  As long as the data being held "looks 
like" 
>> random data, and contains no headers, as far as anybody knows it IS random 
>> data.  The data holder cannot know.
>
>I didn't say he had to know anything about whether the data was encrypted 
>or not.  I would point out that the data holder who is convinced I was 
>spending good money to store random bits would probably not be the data 
>holder I would pick to hold my data in the first place, but this is a 
>tangent, as knowing if the data is encrypted is irrelevent.
>But I'm sure my view is just a Nazified one.  In Bellville (Bellview?), 
>I'm sure everyone pays money to store megabytes of random data.


Justa sec!  "Megabytes of random data"?  Pardon me, but we're talking 
something which is alleged to be a KEY!  Perhaps you're too dense to follow 
this idea, but an IDEA key is 128 _bits_, and even a long RSA key is 2048 
bits, or only 256 bytes.  

So where did you get this "megabytes of random data" anyway?  Unfortunately, 
it appears that your brain is in neutral while your fingers are in 5th gear.

I don't suppose it would be particularly merciful at this point to mention 
steganography.  Unicorn is already vastly discredited as it is; I wouldn't 
want to be accused of rubbing it in, right?

Aw, why not.  He deserves it.  

Steganography is, basically, hiding data (usually already encrypted) in an 
existing file (often an audio file or a GIF) in such a way that it is 
undetectable.  The file it's hidden in, which is usually far larger (10x, 
100x, or even more) than the data to be hidden, is not appreciably changed 
by the process, and if it is well done the data is undetectable.  This means 
that if the picture is a 25,600 byte GIF of your late granny, which you are 
keeping for sentimental reasons, for every 99 bits of granny there is one 
bit of RSA key. Show the file to the judge, say "that's my late granny!" and 
he'll see that it is.  

Now, if you're operating according to your normal clueless level, you'll try 
to claim that the judge will fine the person ANYWAY.  Perhaps, but that 
merely goes to further justify my favorite method of dealing with these 
miscreants:  I work from what I consider a reasonable assumption that people 
shouldn't be obligated to tolerate shit from the government, and fining 
people on principle is an excellent example of the government going too far. 
 Only if you can demonstrate a reliable method of stopping this, permanently 
and rapidly, should anybody bother with your opinions.  Asking people to 
resort to "the political process" is probably what King George did for the 
American colonies 220 years ago.


>Easier said than done.  If you want to use this system, be my guest.
>Saying the Gestapo is a bad thing doesn't make it magically go away.

Sadly, saying Unicorn is clueless doesn't make him shut up, either.

>> Naturally, you won't address this 
>> problem, but the man-on-the-street is more realistic about his own privacy.  
>> How many times must I raise this issue?  How many times do you ignore it?  
>> Face it, people are smarter than you give them credit for.  They will simply 
>> not tolerate any more shit from the government.
>
>Funny, the latest primary has been one of the highest voter turn outs in 
>quite a while (except in Deleware).  Considering those are the law-and-order 
>types who are most likely to invade personal liberities, I think its a 
>bit hard to make the case that the temper of the country is anything but 
>very pro-political process.

Unicorn again displays his cluelessness.  

If people know that the system is sick, and they believe (even wrongly) that 
the only way to fix the problem is through "the political process,"  they 
can reasonably be expected to take one last, desperate effort at fixing the 
situation.  That doesn't make anybody "pro-political-process," in fact they 
could be disgusted with the lack of progress that this system produces.  
They simply believe that they have no alternative.

To put it in simple terms that even you should be able to understand, the 
fact that a drowning person moves his arms and legs around a lot doesn't 
mean that he LIKES to swim, it may merely mean that he likes drowning even 
less.


>Again, this will be my last posting on yet another thread.  Mr. Bell has 
>devolved again into ranting lunacy and that feedback loop that prevents 
>him from confining himself to the merits of the debate.

He's going to keep saying "this will be my last posting" whenever he grows 
tired of getting his butt kicked.  I guess that's the Unicorn equivalent of 
an EOF (end-of-file) character.

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com