[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New GAK Bill
To: [email protected]
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 01:01:59 -0400
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
Subject: Re: Mandatory key escrow bill text, backed by FBI
This is shocking.
For a legal analysis of why mandatory domestic key escrow would
not (most likely) be constitutional for non-commercial messages,
see parts III & IV of:
A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law |
U. Miami School of Law | [email protected]
P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's hot here.
Here's an excerpt from the June version of the Secure Public
Networks Act (McCain-Kerrey Bill S.909), the revised draft bill
now being circulated that Declan quoted:
TITLE I - DOMESTIC USES OF ENCRYPTION
SEC. 101. LAWFUL USE OF ENCRYPTION.
Except as otherwise provided by this Act or otherwise provided by law,
it shall be lawful for any person within any State to use any encryption,
regardless of encryption algorithm selected, encryption key length
chosen, or implementation technique or medium used.
SEC. 102. PROHIBITION ON MANDATORY THIRD PARTY ESCROW
OF KEYS USED FOR ENCRYPTION OF CERTAIN COMMUNICATIONS.
Neither the Federal Government nor a State may require the escrow of
an encryption key with a third party in the case of an encryption key
used solely to encrypt communications between private persons within
the United States.
SEC. 103. VOLUNTARY PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION IN KEY
The participation of the private persons in the key management
infrastructure enabled by this Act is voluntary.
For full text of the June version: