[3138] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Top Pentagon official declares no one has a right to secrecy.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Meredith)
Tue Aug 4 17:13:19 1998
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 19:34:06 +0100
From: Andrew Meredith <meredith@mot.com>
To: cryptography@c2.net
Deputy Secretary of Defense John J. Hamre said:
>
> No, I don't agree with that because it isn't just a smart guy
> thinking up an algorithm and putting it on a PC.
Is it perhaps a literate guy reading Applied Crypto or some such and
copying the code character by character into his C compiler ? Or more to
the point someone with a freeware browser and an ISP account downloading
the thing ready compiled.
> You know, it's creating the infrastructure for a security
> environment that that encryption rides on.
What does this actually mean?
You got email ? .. you got PGP ? .. you got strong crypto! If it really
is strong crypto you can send it over anything you like. You can laser
write it on the moon for that matter !
> That turns out to be much more demanding than you think.
I might think that if I knew what he meant :)
> After all, PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) is out on the net, right?
Correct
> There aren't that many people that are able to pick up
What *is* the latest estimate of the number of users on the net ?
> you just can't set up PGP between you and somebody else.
This one blew my mind ... I was under the impression that I found it
trivially easy to do just that. Maybe my memory really is on its way
out.
> And if you do, it's a good thing to look at.
I do, therefore ..
Anyway, I found his speech very illuminating. I view all this from over
the pond and I can understand what the questioner meant when he said:
"I mean, I guess I just don't understand -- feel like we're over
here trying to get the barn door closed and there is no back to
the barn. (Laughter) "
Maybe the US Military should get their 10 year olds to download PGP from
a European .. or better still Russian site and mail each other some
encrypted stuff.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, I do believe that both
sides in this debate should be arguing from a basis of fact. It really
is pretty easy for someone who knows how to use a computer and the Net
to do just exactly what he thinks is hard. I just want whatever you guys
decide to do to be based on rational fact and not emmotion. We are
undoubtedly going to inherit it once you've finished with it, that's the
usual way of things.
I guess I just don't understand either ...
Andy M
Swindon, England
