[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" 
              <[email protected]>
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:

     http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/clipper.htm


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
MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE.

The participation of the private persons in the key management 
infrastructure enabled by this Act is voluntary.

----------

For full text of the June version:

     http://jya.com/s909.htm