re secret algorithm re clipper chip and crypto key escrow strnlght netcom com david sternlight writes though some may argue about the nose of the camel it s worth noting that the government proposal is limited to scrambled telephony if it is only used for that purpose and does not extend to electronic mail or file as usual david sternlight is demonstrating his inability to read the proposal clearly states the initiative will involve the creation of new products to accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure telecommunications networks and wireless communications links it speaks about telecommunications in general read it again david maybe you ll understand it the next time nah probably not encryption then it is an improvement over the current mass produced standard civilian technology which with a few exceptions is limited to easy to break inverters that s exactly what the government wants all sheep minded people to think let s look at the current situation it allows to almost anybody to eavesdrop almost everybody unless secure and i mean secure encryption is used what will happen when if ha optimists the new proposal gets accepted almost nobody except some will be able to eavesdrop everybody else but the ability of these some to eavesdrop will be guaranteed the proposal emphasizes on the former almost nobody which is clearly an improvement and forgets to mention the drawbacks of the latter guaranteed yes my statement assumes that the next step will be to make the strong crypto unlawful you think that it will not happen good luck note that the big issue for the feds is the continued ability to wiretap it s not just continued ability it s guaranteed ability before we go off the deep end with long discusions about secure crypto for e mail and files let s focus on this yeah that s exactly what your government wants you to think let s take small steps one at a time concentrate on the current one don t think about the future trust us one question that was not asked in the release is whether this proposal is limited to telephony or if the government intends to expand it it s not asked because the proposal clearly says that this is the intention they unlike you read what they write though i share many of the concerns expressed by some i find the proposal less threatening than many others since right now most americans have no secure telephony and any jerk with a pair of clip leads and a goat can eavesdrop this would also plug up the security hole in cellular and cordless phones yes it will it will stop the jerk who is eavesdropping now it will allow only to the government to eavesdrop if the scheme is secure of course which is yet to be proven but how do you know that the jerk you are fearing now will not get a government job tomorrow the new proposal guarantees him the ability to eavesdrop then hell that will even motivate him to get that job if he indeed is that mentally pervert reading between the lines i infer that the system is highly secure without access to the keys great the greatest cryptographer of all times david sternlight tm has succeeded to evaluate the new system in the absense of any details whatsoever and has concluded that it is highly secure i guess that comes from the background of working some years for the two major crypto evaluating companies right gee now the government can save all that money and trouble to ask a secret council of crypto experts to secretly analyse the new secret method for david sternlight has already done all the job for them this would meet the needs of u s businesses confronted by rich and powerful adversaries including french and japanese security services and rich japanese companies it allows the nsa to make available some of its better stuff while protecting law enforcement needs trust us we re from the government and we re here to help you most legitimate u s corporations trust the nsa and would be delighted to have a high security system certified by them even at the price of depositing keys in escrow i see no difficulty in creating a reliable those who are prepared to trade their liberties for the promises of future safety do not deserve either this or something like that i don t have the exact quote but the meaning is the same has been said by one of your great men maybe you should study their works more carefully if you have the brains to understand them of course from my point of view this is a fair starting point there are concerns that need to be addressed including the reliability of the escrows but in the main question is to guarantee to availability of really secure cryptography to the masses gee if the proposal was saying we guarantee that every american will still have the full right to use any kind of encryption s he would like and regard this proposal as just a default voluntary implementation there would have been much less opposition for some reason they didn t even try to promise you that i wonder why was orwell off only by years return we get access to high security crypto no in return you get crypto that is guaranteed to be crippled many have suggested that des and other systems may be breakable by the nsa and hence others similarly skilled and endowed while the above is just rumors and while even if it is true it is not done easily the new scheme can is guaranteed to be easily breakable by anybody who has the two keys it might be also breakable by somebody who does not have them but knows the right trick or who has only one of them nsa also told you that des is secure why don t you simply trust them huh there is at least a good possibility which should be checked that the proposed system is not so breakable it doesn t have to it is guaranteed to be easily breakable just get the keys it might be even easier but until there is some evidence this is just a wild speculation be nor does it have to have trapdoors if the government can get the keys the trapdoors are there in government s hands the keys pursuant to a legitimate court order thus they can protect legitimate communications against economic adversaries while still being able to eavesdrop on crooks pursuant to a court order legitimate and who decides what communications are legitimate oh i guess it s the government right the guys who already have the keys it s kinda if i have the keys from your car and i am asked to decide who has the right to use it legitimately in discussing this let s try to avoid the nastiness personal attacks and noise of some previous threads impossible since you are demonstrating the same level of incompetence and ignorance as in the provious threads this is a substantive and technical issue and personal remarks have no place in such a discussion unfortunately i have yet to see you posting a technically competent message regards vesselin vesselin vladimirov bontchev virus test center university of hamburg tel fax fachbereich informatik agn pgp public key available on request vogt koelln strasse rm c e mail bontchev fbihh informatik uni hamburg de d hamburg germany
