Re: GAK/weak crypto rationale?

>intercepts requested and authorized in the past year.  As I recall, the
>number was quite small - around 12K [?].  Someone had found this out
>through an FOIA request, perhaps, (my recollection of it is poor). It was

I think it's about 1200.

>not a large number, anyway.  I must conclude that the actual number of
>intercepts is much, much larger than they are saying, and that they must
>be getting what they perceive to be good intel from all this snooping.
>

A more cautious conclusion would be would be that the importance (to the
LEA's) of the busts made with crypto is much larger than the numbers
suggest.  You could interpret that a lot of ways:  I suspect that
high-profile career-enhancing cases are highly dependent on wiretaps.

> 
> >intercepts requested and authorized in the past year.  As I recall, the
> >number was quite small - around 12K [?].  Someone had found this out
> >through an FOIA request, perhaps, (my recollection of it is poor). It was
> 
> I think it's about 1200.
> 
> >not a large number, anyway.  I must conclude that the actual number of
> >intercepts is much, much larger than they are saying, and that they must
> >be getting what they perceive to be good intel from all this snooping.
> >
> 
> A more cautious conclusion would be would be that the importance (to the
> LEA's) of the busts made with crypto is much larger than the numbers
> suggest.  You could interpret that a lot of ways:  I suspect that
> high-profile career-enhancing cases are highly dependent on wiretaps.

It could also be argued that the number of busts and wire taps will go up 
dramatically as more and more people begin to use communications in more 
integrated ways with thier life and career.  It is kind of a fallacy, but
communications does seem to be a rapidly growing market.  I imagine the folks
who push for that sort of crap are thinking of the future, else we'd already 
have it.

On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, Andrew Spring wrote:

> >intercepts requested and authorized in the past year.  As I recall, the
> >number was quite small - around 12K [?].  Someone had found this out
> >through an FOIA request, perhaps, (my recollection of it is poor). It was
> 
> I think it's about 1200.
> 
> >not a large number, anyway.  I must conclude that the actual number of
> >intercepts is much, much larger than they are saying, and that they must
> >be getting what they perceive to be good intel from all this snooping.
> >
> 
> A more cautious conclusion would be would be that the importance (to the
> LEA's) of the busts made with crypto is much larger than the numbers
> suggest.  You could interpret that a lot of ways:  I suspect that
> high-profile career-enhancing cases are highly dependent on wiretaps.

No question.  Many high profile public corruption, Mafia, and high-level 
narcotics trafficking cases are made with wiretaps.  In our district, we 
managed to convict almost 20 people in an investigation of the state 
legislature, including the now-former Speaker of the House and > 6 other 
legislators.  Bribing lobbyists took hits, etc.

Particularly effective were the court-approved video and audio tapes of 
the Speaker taking a bribe in exchange for certain action on legislation 
and responding to the bribing party:   "Well bless your heart."
That has become the office's mantra.

I understand the same was true of the South Carolina state legislature 
investigation (wiretaps). 

A number of previous investigations of our legislature failed over the 
past 15 years as the stonewall held.  Wiretaps, hidden microphones, and 
hidden cameras put corrupt politicians (I know - redundant) out of business.

I don't doubt that wiretaps may sometimes be abused despite the 
incredibly onerous review process, but they have positive aspects, too.

Not a lawyer on the Net, although I play one in real life.
**********************************************************
Flame way! I get treated worse in person every day!!

> Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net> writes:
> No question.  Many high profile public corruption, Mafia, and high-level...
> ...In our district, we managed to convict almost 20 people...
> Particularly effective were the court-approved video and audio tapes of...

> I don't doubt that wiretaps may sometimes be abused despite the 
> incredibly onerous review process, but they have positive aspects, too.

In how many of these cases did you fail to get the necessary information
because of encryption?  Has this proportion been changing over the years?

	Jim Gillogly
	Hevensday, 21 Halimath S.R. 1995, 23:06

On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, Jim Gillogly wrote:

> 
> > Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net> writes:
> > No question.  Many high profile public corruption, Mafia, and high-level...
> > ...In our district, we managed to convict almost 20 people...
> > Particularly effective were the court-approved video and audio tapes of...
> 
> > I don't doubt that wiretaps may sometimes be abused despite the 
> > incredibly onerous review process, but they have positive aspects, too.
> 
> In how many of these cases did you fail to get the necessary information
> because of encryption?  Has this proportion been changing over the years?

I wasn't personally involved in any of the cases, but I susupect the 
answer re encryption is zero.  There was the time the FBI agent failed to 
push the record button, however.

My response was to the wiretap correlation to career-making cases.  I 
don't believe encryption is widespread enough yet to be a serious problem 
in the Title III area.  It is a potential problem, though, as encryption 
(rightfully) spreads.  The question I am debating with myself, with all 
of your help, is what the policy "ought to be."

Even if I ultimately come down in my own mind on the Cypherpunks side of 
the line, understand that, as far as policy goes (and, hell, everything 
else for that matter), I'm a nobody.  But I try to make up my own mind 
about what is right.

EBD


> > 	Jim Gillogly
> 	Hevensday, 21 Halimath S.R. 1995, 23:06
> 

Not a lawyer on the Net, although I play one in real life.
**********************************************************
Flame way! I get treated worse in person every day!!