ZnewsCovering technology since 1996
Historical archive · 1996

U.S. Government Encryption Policies

Captured · Original Wayback snapshot

back to the current Znews.com


ZNEWS FEATURE:

by Cynthia Kurkowski
Week of July 29, 1996
Updated every Monday
continued from Znews front page...

While the Administration and NSA argue that the export restrictions keep strong encryption programs out of terrorists' reach, in fact, terrorists and criminals can choose from more than 500 encryption programs in over 65 countries to download off the Internet. It is estimated that over 90 percent of the cryptographic white papers originate outside the United States, reflecting the vast amount of foreign academic research and development, which result in a diverse offering of encryption products.

"They are not stopping it [encryption], they are just changing who is driving it," said Bruce Schneier, president of Counterpane Systems, a consulting firm specializing in cryptography and computer security.

Whitfield Diffie, an engineer at Sun Microsystems, says weak encryption is in line with the main directive of the NSA: to monitor communications to uncover national security violations. An intelligence officer whose primary job is to read encrypted communications cannot afford to dedicate vast amounts of time and resources to cracking strong encryption keys.

Ken Bass, partner at Venable, Baetjer, Howard and Civiletti, LLP, agrees that current export controls were born from NSA's desire to inhibit strong encryption because they had to crack them. By restricting the deployment of strong encryption software, NSA has "induced an arms control race with cryptographers." Bass argues that if the NSA had not closed cryptographic programs to users, people would have been satisfied with simpler encryption. But by calling attention to encryption, it has given hackers a motive for cracking U.S.-endorsed encryption programs, and thus, the NSA "shot itself in the foot" by inadvertently driving the production of stronger encryption programs.

The FBI's advocacy of key escrow is also said to be grounded in its latest efforts to push for wire tapping funds. Under the current Administration, law enforcement has reportedly set records for the number of wire taps performed. Yet, the FBI and government key escrow advocates fail to explain why they need to monitor people electronically to enforce laws. Under existing laws, law enforcement agencies (including the FBI) cannot use electronic surveillance to uncover crimes; they must first present a "just cause" for surveillance. The surveillance is used for gathering solid evidence for criminal conviction.

Barry Steinhardt, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union says wire tapping is an unnecessary activity given its track record. According Steinhardt, wire tapping during this decade has resulted in a17 percent success rate of finding convictable evidence compared to a 50 percent rate in the 1970s. He says the U.S. Administration (and citizens) would not tolerate such inefficiencies in other government programs; the programs would be terminated.

Privacy advocates calling for reformed encryption policies acknowledge the national security concerns, but say the current policies have proven themselves ineffectual and detrimental to our economy and culture, and should therefor be reformed through public forum discussions.

Supporting these claims, U.S. representative Anna Eschew (D-CA) says, "we need to loosen export policies, while addressing national security concerns of the administration."


Text copyright 1996
Terra Firma & Znews.com
Linked images on this page belong to the sites linked