Slashdot Mirror
Reno Against Easing Crypto Export Laws
ChuckRoast writes "Attorney General Janet Reno and FBI Director Louis Freeh, on behalf of the Clinton Administration, are objecting to legislation that aims to
decontrol encryption because it makes their job tougher. Go figure.
"
This is the same Janet Reno who turned down a request to look at the computer files of a suspected Chinese gov't spy at a nuclear weapons lab (the only denial of such as request during her tenure) at the same time her boss Bill was pocketing millions in illegal Chinese gov't campaign contributions. She's got bigger problems than crypto.
On the one hand, the FBI asserts that terrorists are already using encryption to great effect to thwart investigators. On the other hand, the FBI maintains that easing current controls would increase terrorist use of encryption. But their own words belie the truth. Criminals and terrorists are already using technically unbreakable encryption. Legal controls on encryption will have absolutely no effect on the FBI's efforts to pursue criminals. The criminals will use encryption even if it is outlawed.
The only logical conclusion to draw from the FBI statements is that the FBI wants restrictions on encryption, not because they want to spy on criminals, but because they want to spy on law abiding citizens. It is a truth that many in this community figured out a long time ago.
I don't know much about Bush, but Gore's wife Tipper is extremely active in pro-censorship organizations - I believe she was behind the "Parental Advisory" labels on CDs.
Aside from that, Gore's rabidly anti-technology book Earth in the Balance is required reading before making up your mind about him.
D
----
The logic behind it is that it has nothing to do with Terrorists, the Mafia, or the Chinese. Anyone that determined can get their own crypto system as it is, and not even the American Government is stupid enough to think they can stop them.
In reality it is just a huge FUD campaign against the whole Crypto technology. By passing a bunch of confusing and unenforceable laws they are slowing/destroying the standardization of strong public-key crypto techniques and development of key distribution systems etc.
Face it, the FBI, NSA,CIA, Justice Department, have been spying on YOU, the American people, for years. Loosing that ability because Crypto is widely accepted is what they are afraid of, not terrorists.
HMMMmmmmmmm...
It is my understanding that the FBI operates within the borders of the US and its territories, while the CIA conducts operations outside those borders. This line is clearly defined.
How is it that EXPORTING encryption can make the FBI's job harder if it's scope isn't supposed to expand beyond our borders? Am I wrong about the previous distinction, or is the FBI illegally conducting operations abroad?
Even in cases where we have American soil somewhere else (embassies), the US Marines or State Dept. take care of securtity. The FBI would be wasting their time and probably breaking any number of laws by monitoring the communications of foriegn nationals in this situation.
This seems more like an NSA thing to me than something the FBI would want. US citizens have strong crypto. The FBI has no legal business abroad (I think...let me know if I'm wrong). Why do they even care about Exports??
The fact is that the FBI can't STOP terrorist acts. You can speak in code on a pay phone and they wouldn't even think to listen in until you did something terrible. Why would any net-savvy international terrorist use email anyway, when they know they'll be leaving copies all over the net on the way to the destination. And some idiot on the other end could leave the plaintext on his drive. An anonymous phone call to some other anonymous person leaves no copies. RE...probably more secure anyway (if you talk in code or something...there always IS echelon) The reasonable explanation for weak crypto is to gather evidence after the fact. Export controls DON'T save lives, they just make for craftier terrorists.
International terrorists who commit acts of terror within the US are going to buy crypto here legally, and give it to their friends abroad regardless of the law.
It seems that the FBI likes to be able to imprision anyone who wants to send a secure message to mom back in the old country about dad's surprise birthday party. So if we can't find the REAL perpetrators of a terrorist act, they still get to arrest and charge any immigrant with a net connection and blame him. This way, Jan, Lou and the Prez (whoever's in office at the time) still get to look good on the TV news.
Meanwhile...we're losing lots of money in international markets.
anyway...tell me if I said something we all don't know already.
dan
"Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
Yep. The FBI does operate outside the US, mainly in a "consulting" capacity. See:i (teaching Australian police profiling techniques)
l /intl.2.html (about the FBI investigating the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia)
7 2.html (FBI targets offshore betting sites - not the users!)
h tml (FBI agents and Kenyan police, meanwhile, raided the Nairobi offices of a Saudi Arabian charity, the Mercy International Relief Agency, in connection with the bombing, hauling away documents, computers and cash, an employee said Friday.)
t ml (Executive Order No. 12333 also asserts the President's right to authorize CIA "special activities" (the official euphemism for covert operations) and has legally sanctioned such activities anywhere "in support of national foreign policy objectives abroad." It legalizes "counterintelligence activities...within the United States" on the part of the FBI, CIA, Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. "Specialized equipment, technical knowledge, or assistance of expert personnel may be provided by any of these agencies "to support local law enforcement." All are free to mount electronic and mail surveillance without a warrant, and the FBI may also conduct warrantless "unconsented physical searches" (break-ins) if the Attorney General finds probable cause to believe the action is "directed against a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.")
http://www.info-sec.com/law/law_021998a.html-ss
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1997/09/02/int
http://www4.zdnet.com/intweek/print/980309/2938
http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/special/freeh0821.
http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/JudithAlltop/War.h
IIRC, there are also many instances of the FBI working with European law enforcement, but I think these samples prove the FBI works outside the US. I can dig up more cases of the CIA working domestically if necessary.
In short, don't believe law enforcement is obeying the law!
"Basically, encryption is the equivlent of an envlope. Right now, e-mail is like a post-card, anyone who want's to read it can when it's on it's way to the person you sent it to.
What we should be able to do is have some small sence that only the intended reciepent get's to open the letter, not your internet providor, or any computer cracker that want's to take a peak. Encryption is basically our electronic envlope for email.
Even with encryption, if someone manages to open your letters, you won't have hard evidance that they did, because the recipent won't be able to see the tear in the envlope.
But as of today, the US government is saying that we can only send post cards across the border, your not allowed to use the electronic envlopes, because they want to read all of it."
They said increasing numbers of terrorist groups, drug traffickers, child pornographers and financial criminals already are using the scrambling technology to avoid detection and frustrate prosecution.
So who are they targeting with this one? They admit that the criminals are already using such technology and that has them defeated. What possible reason is there to stop the normal people from using such technology. HMM (btw why is it when anyone authority talks about how we need to control the net they bring up porn?)
Fourth Ammendment:Ahh, but eschleon covered international communications!
Apparently, the U.S. would let it slip to one of the international partners (UK, Australia) that they wanted info on certain U.S. citizens, the foreign folks would do the actual snooping, and then let the info trickle back into US hands. Certainly against the spirit of the law, if not the actual words. (Ref: Australian sites on Echelon).
...phil
...phil
"For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
...violating make crypto export laws is the least of my problems.
And the government is missing the obvious points about the whole crypto situation:
It's illegal to export mechanisms to achieve certain strengths of encryption. However, it's perfectly legal for me to send an encrypted message outside of the country. Then again, if I'm encrypting confidential information that I wouldn't want the government to see, I probably wouldn't care if they tried getting me for breaking crypto/munitions laws. (See above.)
People inside the United States already have the means to achieve strong levels of encryption. If the government is trying to say they're having problems spying on their on people, then they're screwed from the get-go -- continuing to make crypto exports illegal won't make their lives any easier since US citizens already have the technology.
There is no logic in not allowing US-developed strong crypto to leave the country. It screws the individuals and companies in the US that do crypto research and develop the products.
Look at Netscape/Microsoft -- they weren't able to export 128-bit versions of their browsers for years because of munitions export laws. Non-US-developed "wrappers" for Netscape Navigator/MS Internet Explorer shortly popped up, however, giving the 40-bit export versions of the browsers nearly the same functionality as the 128-bit versions. Who got screwed? Netscape and MS. Who accomplished nothing? The US government.
If the government is worried about not being able to easily peek at data in other countries, they're screwed from the get-go again -- chances are that the other countries already have the technology that the US government is legally preventing from going across the borders.