michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (Michael Maxwell) (11/06/86)
In article <249@runx.OZ> zeta@runx.OZ (Nick Andrew) writes: >...I would not bet that the Russian's didn't already have the full >text of both DES and crypt(1) methods, with 'C' source... > For state or national secrets the Russians can simply send somebody >to the USA to pick up the source code from any site with crypt(1) and a >source license. I shouldn't butt in on this, but... I would guess that even our government has the sense to know that the Russians have these encryption algorithms (or better ones--they do have mathematicians, you know). My guess is that the people our government is trying to keep these from are rather small terrorist groups, small time drug runners, etc. If such groups have good connections (as `larger' drug runners no doubt have), this is pointless, but many of the terrorist groups are (fortunately) fragmented enough that they may not have sources for these things, nor the skills to make them given a knowledge of the algorithms. Likewise the smaller drug runners and farmers. Purely speculation on my part, though... What? Credit my employer with my brilliant ideas??? No way!! -- Mike Maxwell Boeing Advanced Technology Center ...uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!michaelm
elg@usl.UUCP (Eric Lee Green) (11/12/86)
In article <770@bcsaic.UUCP> michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (Michael Maxwell) writes: >In article <249@runx.OZ> zeta@runx.OZ (Nick Andrew) writes: >>...I would not bet that the Russian's didn't already have the full >>text of both DES and crypt(1) methods, with 'C' source... >> For state or national secrets the Russians can simply send somebody >>to the USA to pick up the source code from any site with crypt(1) and a >>source license. > >I shouldn't butt in on this, but... I would guess that even our government >has the sense to know that the Russians have these encryption >algorithms (or better ones--they do have mathematicians, you know). My >guess is that the people our government is trying to keep these from are >rather small terrorist groups, small time drug runners, etc. Uh, all the terrorists that *I* know could care less about encryption algorithms or what have you... the kind of secrets they're after, is "where are cops", and "where is there a hole in the radar coverage so that I can get my boatfull of coke in?", or, "How can I turn an ordinary rifle off the shelf into an automatic weapon". Most terrorists are pretty technically unsophisticated... a good thing, too, because U.S. (and other) communications facilities are very vulnerable to acts of terrorism if you know what you're doing. >What? Credit my employer with my brilliant ideas??? No way!! Don't worry! -- Eric Green {akgua,ut-sally}!usl!elg, elg%usl.CSNET (Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509) " In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (Michael Maxwell) (11/14/86)
In article <1000@usl.UUCP> elg@usl.UUCP (Eric Lee Green) writes: >In article <770@bcsaic.UUCP> michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (me) writes: >>I shouldn't butt in on this, but... I would guess that even our government >>has the sense to know that the Russians have these encryption >>algorithms (or better ones--they do have mathematicians, you know). My >>guess is that the people our government is trying to keep these from are >>rather small terrorist groups, small time drug runners, etc. > >Uh, all the terrorists that *I* know could care less about encryption >algorithms or what have you... [they care about] >"where are cops", and "where is there a hole in the radar coverage so >that I can get my boatfull of coke in?"... >Most terrorists are pretty technically unsophisticated... That's exactly what I mean. They may need to pass info about where the holes in the radar coverage are, when a guard that's in their pay is on duty, etc., but they don't want other people listening in on them. At the same time, they don't have the sophistication to write their own encryption algorithms, but they can certainly buy such a program. I'd bet that a number of them are using computers to keep track of their potential victims, partners, etc., and --yes--even form email. I would be, if I were they. -- Mike Maxwell Boeing Advanced Technology Center ...uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!michaelm
andrew@stc.co.uk (11/18/86)
In article <389@cdx39.UUCP> wegrzyn@cdx39.UUCP (Chuck Wegrzyn) writes: | While everyone has been discussing whether or not there are export controls, | no one has forward the notion that it doesn't matter. Everyone has some amount | of conscience, and it should come into play in determining what is done. Laws | and policies that are stupid and useless ought to be violated. After all, the | right of civil disobedience is an American right. Is this in your bill of rights? I'm surprised. More to the point however I must disagree with your premise that disobaying an unacceptable law will cause its repeal. More effective is the view of the long-time punch columnist, and MP AP Herbert... To achieve its repeal a law must be scrupulously ENFORCED, the resulting public outcry is the only catylist to legislation that can possibly be effective. references: Uncommon Law and More Uncommon Law AP Herbert, Methuen & Co. -- Regards, Andrew Macpherson. <andrew@tcom.stc.co.uk> {backbone}!ukc!stc!andrew "Sometimes a majority simply means all the fools are on one side" --- Christian Science Monitor