remarkable recent stories

I haven't seen much dialogue on some key things that have popped up
recently of high relevance to this list; forgive me if these are covered
in threads (inappropriately named?):

1. GNN had an article in which Madsen (puzzle palace coauthor I believe)
stated that the NSA was trying to restrict anonymity by working behind
the scenes with Lotus, Microsoft, etc.  major meat for TCM's "NSA visits"
compendium assuming he's still working on it.  also, it sounds like the
most direct evidence that the NSA is working against anonymity in cyberspace, 
something that really surprises me.

2. the same article had Madsen stating that the NSA is vacuuming down
Internet traffic. he gave the likely entry points that they are doing this.
this is one of the first major credible insistences I've seen that
the NSA is doing this. (there are of course a bazillion urban legends
that the NSA does this). Madsen claimed that some private companies
were getting contracts for the work. hmmmmmmm, possibility of some
cyphersabotage here, like what went on with mycotronix? (sp?)

3. the absolute biggest blockbuster of them all: the NSA supposedly
did a study about how crypto regulations affect US competitiveness in
the international marketplace and *concluded* they were damaging it.
(surprise!!)  the Commerce Dept. has recommended *easing* export 
regulations.  

this is very notable for several reasons:
- The NSA would probably not release the study unless they were hinting
at a new policy decision. they do a bazillion studies surely but none of
them see the light of the public day. why would they release *this* one?

- the commerce dept is probably heavily influenced by the NSA-- i.e. I doubt
that they would come out with a favorable recommendation for crypto unless
the NSA approved. however, on the other hand, in the articles there was
a caveat that "if the military and spy agencies allow it". not sure what
was meant by that.

- what I wonder is if the same NSA study was more comprehensive and tried
to look at the overall implications of current or altered crypto export
policy. i.e., did they try to address the question, "what would really
happen to overall US situation if crypto were unregulated? would it mean
better business? more or less crime?" etc.  I have said this before, but
everyone seems to *assume* that unrestricted crypto necessarily releases
the 4 horsemen of the infocalypse, but what if an actual *study* was
done, that potentially *contradicts* this idea? there are many examples of
new technology being introduced that has an effect far different than
that anticipated by the masses or the conventional wisdom, and often much
more benign than expected.

- what this all suggests to me is a possible major policy/political
switch inside the NSA in which possibly someone who is more in favor of 
code making than code breaking is gaining the reigns. its tough to 
guess based on the NSA's entrails, but recent events are some pretty 
odiferous entrails, I'd be interested to here what others think.

Vladimir:

On Tue, 16 Jan 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

> - what this all suggests to me is a possible major policy/political
> switch inside the NSA in which possibly someone who is more in favor of 
> code making than code breaking is gaining the reigns. its tough to 
> guess based on the NSA's entrails, but recent events are some pretty 
> odiferous entrails, I'd be interested to here what others think.

	Interesting theory.   Maybe even factual.  I don't know.

	Caveat:  After decades of secrecy, the NSA has come out
	of the cold so to speak.  Are we to safely assume that
	the NSA has not had it's major mission changed in a few
	major ways when it came into the open?  

	Suppose the NSA was simply being used as a cutout
	for its replacement, which is even more sub rosa?

        xan

        jonathon
        grafolog@netcom.com




**********************************************************************
*								     *
*	Opinions expressed don't necessarily reflect my own views.   *
*								     *
*	There is no way that they can be construed to represent      *
*	any organization's views.				     *
*								     *
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
*	ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/gr/graphology/home.html	     *
*								     *
***********************************************************************

> 	Caveat:  After decades of secrecy, the NSA has come out
> 	of the cold so to speak.  Are we to safely assume that
> 	the NSA has not had it's major mission changed in a few
> 	major ways when it came into the open?  

Banning crypto is stupid.

Banning crypto doesn't keep solid tools out of the reach of the four 
horemen.  More importantly, it won't put a dent in the underlying 
problems -- drug trafficking, money laundering, child pornography, or 
terrorism.  Anyone in America can buy any kind of drug at any time with 
almost no risk of arrest.  How much worse is crypto going to make 
things?

The crypto rules in ITAR cost US businesses a lot of money.  They're not 
doing any good, and they're doing a lot of deomonstrable harm.  If we 
don't sell crypto abraod, other countries will.  We've got a choice:  we 
can export crypto code or crypto jobs.  Let's keep the jobs.

Demonization of anyone -- even the NSA -- ought to be avoided.  

Remember when Jim Bidzos was evil incarnate?  It wasn't so long ago that
he was hassling with PRZ over the use of RSA in PGP.  Take a look at your
source trees for pgp, mixmaster, and the apache-ssl web server -- a lot of
good tools use rsaref. 

Why does Bidzos let us use rsaref?  Is it altruism?  I doubt it -- he
probably felt that it was in his best interests to maintain as much
control over his patents as he could.  Better to have everyone use rsaref
under a legitimate license than to have scofflaws ignoring your authority
all together.  If he had sued PRZ, what would he have gotten?  When you
give away PEM for nothing, what are your damages from a free PGP?  If you
go into court and PRZ wins, what then?  Anything can happen in court -- 
the patent could even get tossed out.

Bizdos gives away rsaref because it's in his interest to do so.  
Adversaries become allies when common interests develop.

The NSA ought to flip on crypto exports because it's in the national
interest to do so.  Passive surveillance is dying, no one can keep it
alive, and we should stop trading jobs, rights, and dollars to prop it up.