Any talk of limiting _existing_ crypto?

OK, so the imminent legislation will ban sale or distribution unescrowed
crypto products after 1999 or 2000 or whatever. Exact details unclear. But
I see no language declaring existing products to be contraband. (Though
such language could still come, of course...nothing would surprised me at
this point.)

So, what about Alice and Bob using PGP 5.0 or Explorer with S-MIME, or
whatever. Plenty of crypto already out there. They can drop their encrypted
text into whatever mail program or browser they're using.

If existing crypto is fully legal to use, then it could be years and years
before the Freeh-Reno-SAFE outlawing has any significant effect.

Is there any reasonable interpretation of any of the SAFE or Pro-CODE bills
that could make it illegal to use preexisting crypto programs (before the
ban)? Any way they could make it illegal to use PGP or Lotus Notes or
whatever in conjunction with a mailer or browser?


If not, then our strategy should be to get the simpler, text-centric,
crypto programs massively and widely deployed. Spend the year or so we have
before D-Day getting crypto onto every CD-ROM being distributed, every
public domain site, etc.

(An old strategy, and one great progress has been made on. But now we have
to really go into high gear, to _really_ get crypto widely deployed.)

Integration with mailers and browsers may not even be such a good idea, as
the evolution of such products will cause obsolescence. Better, perhaps, to
leave the crypto at the "text edit" level, the ASCII level, where it can be
dropped in cleanly to whatever program is current. (Also an old strategy,
one with many advantages.)

The war criminals in Washington will have a real hard time rounding up the
crypto deployed between now and D-Day.

Fucking criminals. Fight the _real_ criminals. Nuke em til they glow.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Tim May <tcmay@got.net> writes:

> If existing crypto is fully legal to use, then it could be years and years
> before the Freeh-Reno-SAFE outlawing has any significant effect.

Indeed.  How about existing software with decades of previous
existence that has hooks where crypto can be plugged in with fairly
trivial effort?

> Is there any reasonable interpretation of any of the SAFE or Pro-CODE bills
> that could make it illegal to use preexisting crypto programs ...

> If not, then our strategy should be to get the simpler, text-centric,
> crypto programs massively and widely deployed. Spend the year or so we have
> before D-Day getting crypto onto every CD-ROM being distributed, every
> public domain site, etc.

We (the XEmacs developers, but I write only for myself as XEmacs
maintainer) already distribute mailcrypt (Emacs lisp code to
integrate PGP with mailers and newsreaders implemented in Emacs
lisp).  It has been possible to integrate encrypted editing with
encryption of the user's choice transparently for some time.

> Better, perhaps, to leave the crypto at the "text edit" level, the
> ASCII level, where it can be dropped in cleanly to whatever program
> is current. (Also an old strategy, one with many advantages.)

I agree.  An Emacs-like architecture makes implementing something like 
this pretty straight-forward.

::
Anon-To: cypherpunks@toad.com

Tim May wrote:
 > Is there any reasonable interpretation of any of the SAFE or Pro-CODE
bills
> that could make it illegal to use preexisting crypto programs (before the
> ban)?

  Govt doesn't need to use a reasonable interpretation. They tell you
what you can and can't do--the judge areees with them--ten years later
the Supremes tell you to go ahead and use it but it no longer runs on
any of the machines in existence.

> Any way they could make it illegal to use PGP or Lotus Notes or
> whatever in conjunction with a mailer or browser?

  Yes. They declare it to be so.
 
> If not, then our strategy should be to get the simpler, text-centric,
> crypto programs massively and widely deployed. Spend the year or so we have
> before D-Day getting crypto onto every CD-ROM being distributed, every
> public domain site, etc.
 > Integration with mailers and browsers may not even be such a good
idea, as
> the evolution of such products will cause obsolescence. Better, perhaps, to
> leave the crypto at the "text edit" level, the ASCII level, where it can be
> dropped in cleanly to whatever program is current. (Also an old strategy,
> one with many advantages.)

  Make it work simply for everyone with the push of a single button.
It doesn't have to be secure, it has to be convenient. The only thing
the masses need is the illusion of security. Then they will cry loudly
when someone tries to take it away.
  Make it so that those who want strong security can jump through the
necessary hoops to get it from the same program so that they can't
take away yours and leave them with theirs. 

> The war criminals in Washington will have a real hard time rounding up the
> crypto deployed between now and D-Day.

  Strong encryption, officer? Yes, my Bouncing Betty Security Disk
is right there in the top drawer. I'll just step back here a little
and let you go get it.
 
Dave Null

Actually, the legislation will ban sale of nonescrowed crypto immediately
upon passage.

As for existing products, no such proposal in draft form... yet... But if
people can use old non-GAK'd crypto, won't terrorists still us it? The
logical conclusion of the FBI's argument is to ban non-GAK'd crypto
outright. I asked Sen. Kyl, Arizona Republican, why he didn't do this. His
response? He didn't have the votes.

At least two months ago.

-Declan


On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Tim May wrote:

> 
> OK, so the imminent legislation will ban sale or distribution unescrowed
> crypto products after 1999 or 2000 or whatever. Exact details unclear. But
> I see no language declaring existing products to be contraband. (Though
> such language could still come, of course...nothing would surprised me at
> this point.)
> 
> So, what about Alice and Bob using PGP 5.0 or Explorer with S-MIME, or
> whatever. Plenty of crypto already out there. They can drop their encrypted
> text into whatever mail program or browser they're using.
> 
> If existing crypto is fully legal to use, then it could be years and years
> before the Freeh-Reno-SAFE outlawing has any significant effect.
> 
> Is there any reasonable interpretation of any of the SAFE or Pro-CODE bills
> that could make it illegal to use preexisting crypto programs (before the
> ban)? Any way they could make it illegal to use PGP or Lotus Notes or
> whatever in conjunction with a mailer or browser?
> 
> 
> If not, then our strategy should be to get the simpler, text-centric,
> crypto programs massively and widely deployed. Spend the year or so we have
> before D-Day getting crypto onto every CD-ROM being distributed, every
> public domain site, etc.
> 
> (An old strategy, and one great progress has been made on. But now we have
> to really go into high gear, to _really_ get crypto widely deployed.)
> 
> Integration with mailers and browsers may not even be such a good idea, as
> the evolution of such products will cause obsolescence. Better, perhaps, to
> leave the crypto at the "text edit" level, the ASCII level, where it can be
> dropped in cleanly to whatever program is current. (Also an old strategy,
> one with many advantages.)
> 
> The war criminals in Washington will have a real hard time rounding up the
> crypto deployed between now and D-Day.
> 
> Fucking criminals. Fight the _real_ criminals. Nuke em til they glow.
> 
> --Tim May
> 
> There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
> Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
> "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
> 
> 
> 
> 
>