March 1993 Communications of ACM Denning on Encryption

I've just read with considerable distress the Dorothy Denning article in 
my March 1993, Communications of the ACM and all the follow up 
discussions supporting or refuting her positions.  I can not in any way 
support the further erosion of the rights I believe I have to personal  
privacy and protection from the abuses of government. I'm contacting 
the EFF as a concerned member and the ACM Risk forum... are there 
more actions we can and should take? 

Professor Denning does not convince me of the benevolence of the 
government nor the necessity for private enterprise to foster 
government programs (such as building in wire tap support or reducing 
the effort of government agencies to invade private messages or 
interactions amongst citizens). A precidential extension might have 
the auto makers building in governors into all vehicles such that they 
can't exceed the national speed limit to support traffic law 
enforcement (the crooks couldn't have faster cars than the cops).

I'd suggest cypherpunks get and read the article if they haven't already 
done so (it covers both wire tap and , as a not too subtle tag on, 
encryption availability). I'd also suggest we direct our responses to 
those who can derail this or similar legislation with the EFF and ACM 
as two likely candidates and congress folks as additional ones. 

My  personal professional dilemma is how can I raise consciousness 
of  the quiet majority who will not immediately be impacted... like my 
retired parents who fear computers like the flu and still have a strong 
belief that the government protects their rights rather than restricts 
them. Their response to Steve Jackson's tiff with the treasury 
department and law enforcement was along the lines that if he had 
nothing to hide the government wouldn't have bothered him.

Still watching quietly, worried, and now letting others know...
Rich

> I've just read with considerable distress the Dorothy Denning article in 
> my March 1993, Communications of the ACM and all the follow up 
> discussions supporting or refuting her positions.  I can not in any way 
> support the further erosion of the rights I believe I have to personal  
> privacy and protection from the abuses of government. I'm contacting 
> the EFF as a concerned member and the ACM Risk forum... are there 
> more actions we can and should take? 
> 
> I'd suggest cypherpunks get and read the article if they haven't already 
> done so (it covers both wire tap and , as a not too subtle tag on, 

But don't buy the articles.  Get them at the library.  No point in giving them 
your money and your opinions! ;^)

> encryption availability). I'd also suggest we direct our responses to 
> those who can derail this or similar legislation with the EFF and ACM 
> as two likely candidates and congress folks as additional ones. 

Next time someone tells me to get in touch with someone to complain to and 
doesn't give me their address, I'LL SCREEM!  Not a flame, just a (subtle) 
suggestion. ;^)

We need to publish the addresses of various people, so that those people can get
a "proper" understanding of our fears/outrage.

Just my $.02.

+----------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| J. Michael Diehl ;-) |  I thought I was wrong once.  But, I was mistaken. |
|                      +----------------------------------------------------+
| mdiehl@triton.unm.edu| "I'm just looking for the opportunity to be        |
| Thunder@forum        |            Politically Incorrect!                  |
| (505) 299-2282       |                        <me>                        |
+----------------------+----------------------------------------------------+