Dorothy Denning

Well, since everyone seems to be talking about Dorothy Denning, I just
thought I'd throw a few things out for discussion.  Number 1, if someone
is an encryption expert (as has been truly/falsely(?) claimed on this
list), then why would they endorse anyone but the recipient being able
to decode the message?  Wouldn't the true belief in privacy be what
would lead one to learn about such things?  Or is it just a toy, as is
surveillance?

Number 2.  People on this list have said that she's an expert in
cryptography. When I read that damned Newsday article posted on
cypherpunks, I thought that she was just a whiny college bitch. The
argument was just very, well, flimsy is the word I guess.  I believe
that Clipper is wrong, but someone could at least write a paper that
would influence more by pointing out its merits, rather than just saying
that the government should start spying on all of us to stop drug
deals....

Anyone know:

A) Is she an expert in cryptography?

B) Is she a college graduate?

C) Was she dropped on her head a lot as a baby?

D) Has she considered the alternatives that suicide offers?

Just kind of annoyed at this whole Big Brother thing, probably because
I'm reading 1984 right now... really a good idea if you haven't yet, and
if you read it, they're is no way you'll possibly think that Clipper is
a good idea...

Also, I've gotten a message through to Ross Perot about our fight
against Clipper, and how to reach me, so if I get a response, I'll let
you guys know.

                                        Anthony

Anthony Ortenzi wrote:

> Number 2.  People on this list have said that she's an expert in
> cryptography. When I read that damned Newsday article posted
> on cypherpunks, I thought that she was just a whiny college bitch.
> The argument was just very, well, flimsy is the word I guess.
> I believe that Clipper is wrong, but someone could at least write
> a paper that would influence more by pointing out its merits,
> rather than just saying that the government should start spying
> on all of us to stop drug deals....

Not to mention that she obviously doesn't keep up with current events. 
The part about the world trade center made me laugh.  Here it is again
for those of you who missed it:

  Opponents say that terrorists will not be so foolish as to use
  encryption to which the government holds the key but will scramble
  their calls with their own code systems.  But then who would have
  thought that the World Trade Center bombers would have been stupid
  enough to return a truck that they had rented?

Maybe it was just a bad miswording, but it certainly doesn't strengthen
the argument as a whole, and doesn't give me much confidence in her
proofreading ability.
(They didn't return the truck, they put a bomb in the truck, it got
destroyed, then the idiot tried to claim that the truck had been stolen,
and demanded his deposit back.)

Dorothy Denning may have a college education, but she is a bit lacking
in social awareness.  She is just a pawn that the NSA is using as a
spokesperson so that they don't have to take the heat from the debate
over clipper.

>Anyone know:

>A) Is she an expert in cryptography?

>B) Is she a college graduate?

>C) Was she dropped on her head a lot as a baby?

>D) Has she considered the alternatives that suicide offers?


The "Dr." in "Dr. Dorothy Denning" should answer question B. Note also
that she's the chair of the CS dept at Georgetown; such positions are
not usually given to those without college degrees.

The answer to question A is somewhat more subjective. I know enough
about cryptography to know that I am NOT an expert in
cryptography. And that means I know much more about cryptography than
most people -- if you follow my meaning.  Although Dr. Denning has
written a highly regarded college textbook on cryptography, I have not
seen anything to demonstrate her expertise in designing a cipher and
evaluating it against attack. This is a far more arcane talent, one
shared by a relative handful of people. It should not be confused with
the ability to apply existing ciphers to various problems, a skill
that she clearly possesses, along with many other people.

This is why I questioned her inclusion on the clipper review
committee, as opposed to, say, Ernie Brickell, whose destruction of
the knapsack public key cryptosystem gives him the kind of actual
experience in cryptanalysis that is essential in such a review.

As for your other questions, I suggest that the case against Clipper
is strong enough that we do not need to resort to ad-hominem attacks
against individuals such as Dr. Denning. I agree that she is, at best,
seriously misguided, but it is not that uncommon for otherwise
intelligent people to disagree seriously on politics.  Remember that
her technical credentials, whatever they may be, gives her no special
insight over the rest of us into the purely political issues here.

Don't get mad, get even. Write code!

Phil

Dr. Denning is a secure systems (OS and databases) 
research from SRI. Her background is in 
capability-based OS (her advisor was MUTICS designer Peter Denning, 
whom she married) and inference of private data from
statistical data bases. Her work is interesting and potentially
contributes to our privacy, but has little direct connection to
cryptanalysis. Phil's objection seems quite reasonable.

I recall a profile of the Dr's Denning in one of the
popular cracker/phreax exposes, (maybe in Markov/Hafner?)

Andy