[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
An Attempt to Hobble SAFE Crypto Bill
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 11:03:33 -0800
From: "--Todd Lappin-->" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/5492.html
An Attempt to Hobble House Crypto Bill
by Rebecca Vesely
9:08am 25.Jul.97.PDT A Republican opponent of a House
bill that would loosen controls on the use and export of
encryption is circulating an amendment that would
effectively cripple the legislation.
The amendment, by Representative Benjamin Gilman
(R-New York), who chairs the International Relations
Committee, would make it unlawful to "manufacture,
distribute, sell, or import any product within the United
States that can be used to encrypt communications or
information if the product does not permit the real-time
decryption of such encrypted communications or
information."
This means that if law-enforcement officials could not
crack an encrypted file within 24 hours - the time that FBI
director Louis Freeh and other law enforcement officials
say is reasonable for accessing information related to a
crime - that strength of encryption would be illegal. The
amendment set a civil penalty of US$100,000 for such
violations.
Currently, the most complex programs that can be cracked
so quickly use 40-bit algorithms. The relative ease of
breaking such code makes it nearly worthless on the
marketplace, the high-tech industry has warned. Stronger
encryption - 56-bit and 128-bit algorithms are being
employed in many products now - is widely viewed as a
cornerstone to the development of electronic commerce.
Stronger code can safeguard data such as credit-card
numbers as it travels over networks.
Gilman had the amendment in hand earlier this week when
his panel marked up the Security and Freedom through
Encryption Act by Representative Bob Goodlatte
(R-Virginia). The bill has been condemned by the
government's chief law-enforcement and national-security
officials because it would prevent domestic controls on
encryption while relaxing export controls. The FBI and
National Security Agency want a domestic key-recovery
system to wiretap digital communications.
Gilman was unsuccessful in trying to insert another
provision during the mark-up - one to give the president
the power to deny crypto export licenses on
national-security grounds.
"The second amendment was a staff proposal that basically
was dependent on what happened to the first amendment,"
said Jerry Lipson, spokesman for the House International
Relations Committee. "There was no sentiment that this one
should be introduced when the first one failed."
A staffer for a congressman who supports the Goodlatte bill
said that the new amendment was a "scare tactic" meant to
show committee members that law enforcement won't stand
for a relaxed approach to encryption policy. Indeed, FBI
director Freeh met one-on-one with 10 International
Relations panel members for hour-long sessions in the days
before the mark-up, the staffer said. Nine of the 10 voted
for the bill anyway.
Some staffers and observers suggest that the Gilman
amendment could be introduced when the bill goes to the
Select Committee on Intelligence. Although the legislation
has 214 co-sponsors in the House, none are members of
that panel. And the bill still must reach two other
committees before it goes to a full House vote: Commerce
and National Security. The deadline for all committees to
address the bill is 5 September.
"They don't draft amendments like this for the heck of it,"
said Alan Davidson, staff counsel for the Center for
Democracy and Technology. "It's a glimpse at what could be a
very frightening future."
Copyright � 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated
companies.
All rights reserved.