[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [New Search]

Fwd: ... titled in a wonderfully Orwellian manner (fwd) YIKES!!





>Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>Subject: FC: House panel votes behind closed doors to build in Big 
Brother
>
>
>Software that protects your privacy is a controlled substance that may 
no
>longer be sold, a Congressional committee decided today.
>
>Meeting behind closed doors this morning, the House Intelligence 
committee
>voted to replace a generally pro-encryption bill with an entirely
>rewritten draft that builds in Big Brother into all future encryption
>products. (The Senate appears to be moving in a similar direction.)
>
>The new SAFE bill -- titled in a wonderfully Orwellian manner the
>"Security and Freedom through Encryption" act even though it provides
>neither -- includes these provisions:
>
>SELLING CRYPTO: Selling unapproved encryption products (that do not
>include "immediate access to plaintext") becomes a federal crime,
>immediately after this bill becomes law. Five years in jail plus fines.
>Distributing, importing, or manufacturing such products after January 
31,
>2000 is another crime.
>
>NETWORK PROVIDERS: Anyone offering scrambled "network service" 
including
>encrypted web servers or even "ssh" would be required to build in a
>backdoor for the government by January 31, 2000. This backdoor must
>provide for "immediate decryption or access to plaintext of the data."
>
>TECHNICAL STANDARDS: The Attorney General will publish technical
>requirements for such backdoors in network service and encryption
>products, within five months after the president signs this bill.
>
>LEGAL TO USE CRYPTO: "After January 31, 2000, it shall not be unlawful 
to
>use any encryption product purchased or in use prior to such date."
>
>GOVERNMENT POWERS: If prosecutors think you may be selling, importing, 
or
>distributing non-backdoor'd crypto or are "about" to do so, they can 
sue.
>"Upon the filing of the complaint seeking injunctive relief by the
>Attorney General, the court shall automatically issue a temporary
>restraining order against the party being sued." Also, there are
>provisions for holding secret hearings, and "public disclosure of the
>proceedings shall be treated as contempt of court." You can request an
>advisory opinion from the government to see if the program you're about
>to publish violates the law.
>
>ACCESS TO PLAINTEXT: Courts can issue orders, ex parte, granting police
>access to your encrypted data. But all the government has to do to get
>one is to provide "a factual basis establishing the relevance of the
>plaintext" to an investigation. They don't have to demonstrate probable
>cause, which is currently required for a search warrant. More
>interestingly, this explicitly gives the FISA court jurisdiction (yes,
>the secret court that has never denied a request for a wiretap). If 
they
>decode your messages, they'll tell you within 90 days.
>
>GOVERNMENT PURCHASING: Federal government computer purchases must use a
>key escrow "immediate decryption" backdoor after 1998. Same with 
networks
>"purchased directly with Federal funds to provide the security service 
of
>data confidentially." Such products can be labeled "authorized for sale
>to U.S. government"
>
>ENCRYPTION EXPORTS: The Defense & Commerce departments will control
>exports of crypto. Software "without regard to strength" can be 
exported
>if it includes a key escrow backdoor and is first submitted to the
>government. Export decisions aren't subject to judicial review, and the
>"president may by executive order waive any provision of this act" if 
he
>thinks it's a threat to national security. Within 15 days, he must send
>a classified briefing to Congress.
>
>ADVISORY PANEL: Creates the Encryption Industry and Information 
Security
>Board, with seven members from Justice, State, FBI, CIA, White House, 
and
>six from the industry.
>
>INTERNATIONAL: The president can negotiate international agreements and
>perhaps punish noncompliant governments. Can you say "trade sancation?"
>
>(Other provisions barring the use of crypto in a crime and some forms 
of
>cryptanalysis are also in the bill.)
>
>Next the Commerce Committee will vote on SAFE, and a former FBI
>agent-turned-Congressman is vowing to ensure that similar language to 
this
>is included. (The committees are voting on the bill in parallel, and a
>four-person team of Congressmen is working to forge a compromise before
>Commerce votes.) Then the heads of the five committees that have 
rewritten
>the legislation will sit down and work out another compromise. If it's
>acceptable to the House Rules committee -- and if the FBI/NSA get what
>they want it will be -- the bill can move to the floor for a vote.
>
>That's why the encryption outlook in Congress is abysmal. 
Crypto-advocates
>have lost, and lost miserably. A month ago, the debate was about export
>controls. Now the battle is over how strict the //domestic// controls 
will
>be. It's sad, really, that so many millions of lobbyist-dollars were 
not
>only wasted, but used to advance legislation that has been morphed into
>a truly awful proposal.
>
>I wrote more about this at:
>
>  http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1385,00.html
>
>--Declan
>
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>This list is public. To join fight-censorship-announce, send
>"subscribe fight-censorship-announce" to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu.
>More information is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [New Search]