Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
RE: a long response to a Short note on new Laws
From: "Stout, Bill" <StoutB () pios com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 1998 14:32:04 -0400
The basic issue I have with these new laws is the general direction (think about the attrition technique used against smoking, from international flights to resturaunts to public streets). 1. CALEA (Carrier Wiretapping law) which is effective y2000. http://www.fbi.gov/calea/calea1.htm. - Allows government to covertly monitor public traffic. Establishes a global precident (see: http://jya.com/stoa-atpc.htm#4 ). (jya.com=cool site) 2. GAK/Encryption control (Limits encryption strength) still lives, though defeated in many forms (Clipper, Key Escrow). - Prevents strong encryption of conversations. 3. Digital Millennium Act (Copywright law effectively outlawing security testing) passed senate 1998. - Weakens overall security by obscurity, stops public 'beta testing' of security mechanisms. Eases the ability to insert covert or mandated government security backdoors. Search for 'Digital Millennium Act' at http://thomas.loc.gov/ , click on [S.2037.ES]. In other words, government wants to monitor your conversations (or thoughts and ideas), prevent you from encrypting them, and prevents you from really securing your computer. The public whitestory/coverstory for the overall effort is 'law enforcement', however the underlying strategic effort is for 'politicial control', and pits government against people rather than 'of and for the people'. Note that governments think in strategic terms, individuals react tactical: Easy win for government. If attrition is a known and well-established precident for establishing control, then such surveillance or security backdoors can easily be mandated for corporate networks perceived as being part of the nations' 'critical infrastructure' (http://www.fbi.gov/programs/iptf/glossary.htm), university networks which harbor many foreign exchange students, social programs which will network the poor or disabled (who have little political protest power), and commercial security products (most easily those from authoritarian/socialist countries). Related: http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct5-24-5.html Bill Stout
Current thread:
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws cfb (Jul 07)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Technical Incursion Countermeasures (Jul 07)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Rick Smith (Jul 08)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Adam Shostack (Jul 08)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Steven M. Bellovin (Jul 12)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Eric Budke (Jul 08)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Technical Incursion Countermeasures (Jul 12)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws David Lang (Jul 08)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Frederick M Avolio (Jul 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Stout, Bill (Jul 07)
- Re: a long response to a Short note on new Laws Technical Incursion Countermeasures (Jul 07)