Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Government Wants Public Encryption Software Removed
Anonymous Coward writes "Saw this one yesterday over at Hacker News Network. According to an article (German or English) published in Teleopolis, Janet Reno sent a letter last May to the German Federal Secretary of Justice outlining the need for the Wassanaar Nations to remove access to all encryption software from the internet as she believes such access renders the Wassanaar agreement impotent. The letter specifically mentions "public domain" encryption software. " Well, now I guess my life really will be an "open book".
We need to fight this like we have never fought anything before. This issue is probably the most important issue that the online community has faced to date, and if we stand idly by, we will lose the most important freedoms we have. It is absolutely imperative that we use every available means to fight this. I'm going to do my part, and I challenge everyone here to do the same. Freedom taken away by force can be retreived by force, but freedom given away is lost forever.- ---------------
---------------------------------------
If you need to point-and-click to administer a machine,
Since when is Janet Reno an architect of foreign policy? Who gave her diplomatic status?
The US Ambassador to Germany needs to put her in line posthaste.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
I think you people are overreacting a bit here. Janet Reno never says that she wants to encourage the banning of all encryption software. What she is requesting is cooperation in enforcing the rules of the Wassenar Agreement on electronically distributed software, as well as software sold in stores, etc. She is not saying that they should ban all distribution of encryption (although she might like that, it is not what she says).
Granted, I am as against restrictions against cryptography as anyone, but if we go on a holy war of flammage on this one, we are going to look like illiterate morons. Reno is advocating that no exception to the export regulations be made for public domain and/or electronically distributed software.
If we are going to make strong encryption easily availible to everyone, we need to fight the battle as intelligent people, not as a bunch of cultish raving lunatics.
-Cheetah
Top 10 documents Janet Reno DOES still want encrypted:
DISCLAIMER: I'm making the following list all up. Please, government people, don't come do bad things to me. I'm just kidding. Really.
10) Secret love letters to Regis Philbin
9) Details of her high school post prom party, where she engaged in inappropriate relations with a llama,as written in a letter to a friend
8) All memoes regarding the "incident" where Ms. Reno accidentally left a pair of kneepads in the Oval Office
7) Memo condoning chinese water torture for Kevin Mitnick
6) Request card from PC Magazine placing an order for the book "Internet Access for Dummies"
5) logfiles from 75 Anonymous Coward "First Posts" to Slashdot, dated several hours after delivery of book mentioned above
4) Hotel receipts indicating preference for in-room hardcore pornography movies featuring men with three testicles
3) Letter from Al Gore thanking her for looking the other way
2) Letter from Bill Gates telling her "no, you have to push the start button in the lower left corner first"
1) All documentation related to failed top-secret cosmetic surgery experiements she was involved with in the seventies that went horribly, horribly wrong.
DISCLAIMER: I'm making the following list all up. Please, government people, don't come do bad things to me. I'm just kidding. Really.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
:)
9 U+0OehDWsnfST3/9
Hash: SHA1
Foo!
That's just totally evil. As a protest, this is signed using GnuPG - properly
GPL'd and everything
Restricting everyone's right to communicate in any fashion they like is
basically assuming everyone's guilty until proven innocent, which sucks.
~PigleT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAjeh5wcACgkQh3MeQyZWueRh+wCeJfrfIVL
r+cAnj1Iwfg2WeMPV9tU0dng/5pRMBHD
=t61T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
~Tim
--
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
Wassenaar does allow for public domain encryption software to be freely distributed.
Reno wants the special clause allowing this to be removed.
A Government can only keep secrets from its own people.
~ ^~~~^~~^~
A measure of how dis-satisfied people are with their government, is...
1) The level of armament of the police
2) The need for a government to "know what its people are up to."
lecture...
The movie "Untouchables" makes a very good point about how the police were representing the federal government, but everyone was *in essence* supporting a different government.
Even then, Al Capone's ledger book was encrypted. Why did Al Capone feel like he couldn't trust the Government with a knowledge of his buisness doings? Becuase the government was so corrupt that they were ready to squash such privacy for its own preservation. Remember how he even payrolled government officials? He was certainly an active supporter of the federal government.
Now obviously that is a little tongue in cheek, but it does point out how this issue is not very resolvable in a debate. Yet the solution is very clear. What keeps Open source so secure? Because it is open, and people can look for daggers so easily.
But even more than that there is participation. People are looking for daggers in software they want to use. Ever dream of working for the Air Force, just to find out if something is happening in Area 51? Ever want to work for the UN to get in on all the secrets that are passed there?
Why do we feel that we need to conceal what we are doing from the government? Why does the Government feel it needs to conceal from us? I think more participation is the best way to expose what is going on to sunlight, and as Learned Hand once said, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."
^~~^~^^~~^~^~^~^^~^^~^~^~~^^^~^^~
Not everything you read on the internet is true. There's no proof that Janet Reno wrote the letter, other than the "reliable source, no really, trust us" note at the end.
It is becoming increasingly evident that we must do something to stop the proliferation of personal automobiles.
It is not our intent to halt an individual's transportation rights, there already exists several means of transportation for individuals, such as the horse.
Personal automobiles are a threat to the public security, as they allow terrorists to rapidly move about with concealed packages (such as heavy weapons or even a thermonuclear bomb).
As you can see, this threat cannot be allowed to continue. It is time to purge our country of these risky machines!
It is becoming increasingly evident that we must do something to stop the proliferation of personal encryption.
It is not our intent to halt an individual's communication rights, there already exists several means of communication for individuals, such as the text.
Personal encryption programs are a threat to the public security, as they allow terrorists to rapidly discuss obscured plans (such as for heavy weapons or even a thermonuclear bomb).
As you can see, this threat cannot be allowed to continue. It is time to purge our country of these risky programs!
Uh, hello, anyone home? The car is out of the garage, everybody knows how to build one, you can't stuff it back in the garage!
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
I've always likened the need for encryption to our present use of curtains. Here's a little spin to demonstrate why.
s/encryption/curtains/g;
s/cryptography/opaque window/g;
s/software/fabric/g;
s/cryptographic/woven/g;
s/strength/opacity/g;
s/electronic/low-cost/g;
s/Internet/counter/g;
s/intangible/privacy-enabling/g;
Dear Minister Däubler-Gmelin:
I wish to thank you and your Government for you efforts to achieve a fair resolution regarding multilateral export controls on curtains products at the recent Wassenaar plenary session on December 2-3, 1998. While no Nation, including the United States, was completely satisfied, I think we made significant progress toward a regime that can support the interests of national security and public safety in the face of the challenges posed by the increasing use of curtains internationally. Given the divergent opaque window policies that the Wassenaar Nations have supported in the past, and the continuing controversy that opaque window policy continues to generate, that 33 Nations managed to find common ground augurs well for our future ability to find solutions that satisfy the divergent needs of privacy, low-cost commerce, national security, and public safety.
Much work remains to be done. In particular, I believe we must soon address the risks posed by low-cost distribution of curtains fabric. Although the Wassenaar Nations have now reached agreement to control the distribution of mass market curtains fabric of certain woven opacity, some Wassenaar Nations continue not to control curtains fabric that is distributed over the counter, either because the fabric is in the "public domain" or because those Nations do not control distribution of privacy-enabling items. While I recognize that this issue is controversial, unless we address this situation, use of the counter to distribute curtains products will render Wassenaar's controls immaterial.
I look forward to our continuing discussions on these and other issues. And again, thank you for your past and future considerations of these issues.
Sincerely, Janet Reno
--
...you get the idea.
--The more you know, the less you know.
But in the letter she says:
Very different.
I would bet that the latter more accuratly shows the policy of the DOJ.
Is not strong and trusted encryption software built by the open and free flow of ideas. How strong would the encryption be that is available to everyone but the governments if there was no electronic distribution?
Check out the Lance Armstrong Foundation
kayaking
Check out ompages.com. I've worked on some papers that explain what the problem is and how to fix it.
People are signing up to help everday. Mirrors, applications, web services are coming, and they are going to be free, anonymous, and no advertisements allowed.
This is an open source project so we need help.
Whether you are a hacker, engineer, web designer, writer, are just curious, there is a something to be done.
As you all can tell from this article, the US government is moving at top speed to halt computer security for the masses.
Since the US government is acting fast, so must the rest of us. Don't just mumble and grumble about the loss of your rights, use your skills to claim ownership of your rights.
Only you can prevent totalitarianism. You must act, this war is being fought online and without national borders. Wherever you live, the time is now to counteract censorship, government monitoring and control.
This is not a paranoid delusion; if you think it is, then remain as you are and accept that consequences that are indeed mounting.
I will post messages like this on /. for every article that relates to limits on crypto. Flame me if you want. I can take it....
Everyone who knows the inners of networks knows perfectly how easy is to eavesdrop any unsecured communication. Every *NIX that respects himself have at least one tool that permits such thing. Some have even a whole artillery inside. Take trinux (www.trinux.org) for example.
However it seems that US DOJ is completely blind to such things. Their will for power is so big that they simply ignore technical specifities, customer interests, public opinion and now diplomatic relations. It is simply amazing how a government body, caring for the justice of its citizens, not only violates their rights but also interferes in the rights of citizens of other countries. DOJ is becoming a danger not only to the national interests of the United States of America but also the whole World.
Apart of this there are two points that turn DOJ activities into a danger of a much broader sense. First is the field they intend to dominate. Encryption is not only an activity but also a scientific and technological field. No one knows what may become tomorrow if they go with this one. They may not only turn Encryption and Signals Encoding scientific fields into a theoretical and technological swamp. Tomorrow someone may well try to shrink the information contained in other fields, turning all Science and Technology into a stalinist dogma. Let us remember that all the crazyness that happenned in USSR during Stalin had started almost the same way. First Economics suffered the first blow. The reasons were quite parallel, in some sense, to DOJ's type of argumentation. Public dessimation of wrong theories about Economy could undermine the hard effort of building the new socialist relationships in the production fields. People would be teached "capitalist" selfish ideas on how to grab others.
All this ended with a weird world where even Darwin was considered a demagogue. Even the founder of modern rocketry in Russia, Korolev had to pass some years in the GULAG. While all these Stalin crazy years didn't last enough to destroy Russian scientific institutes, a lot of its madness echoes even today. Besides, this steel fist on Science fueled a whole set of paranormal extortionists, religious sectants, and criminals of the boo-boo Science, who made their life out of the ignorance of the masses. This was particularly seen on the end of USSR.
But DOJ does not end here. They are starting to act as much as the organs of internal affairs of some totalitarian countries. They now determine what is good or bad for their people. It seems that they are not satisfied to have just The Law behind them. They are excited to get The Truth also.