metzger@watson.ibm.com (Perry E. Metzger) (05/22/91)
[The opinions contained herein are not necessarily those of IBM; I'm acting on my own, folks.] Long, but hopefully informative article, about my call to Senator Biden's staff member who actually is handling this, follows. In article <1991May20.162520.4822@b11.ingr.com> craig@b11.ingr.com (Craig Presson) writes: >In article <1991May19.231103.19394@bellcore.bellcore.com>, karn@epic.bellcore.com (Phil Karn) writes: >|> Yesterday I received a response to my letter to Senator Joseph >|> Biden expressing concern about the anti-cryptography provisions of >|> S.266. Here it is in its entirety. --Phil >The way I read this letter, it's extremely generous to call it a >"response". It is utterly non-responsive except for a "proof by >vigorous assertion": >|> I wish to assure you that this bill and U.S. anti-terrorism >|> efforts would not infringe upon the legitimate privacy rights of > ---------------------------- >|> individuals. > ----------- >It looks like we and Senator Biden do not agree on some basic >definitions here. I actually bothered to follow up on my (identical) form letter from Sen. Biden's office. I spoke to John Bentivoglio, who is on the Senator's Judiciary committee staff (not his personal staff), who claims to have been the person who drafted the letter that went out on Joe Biden's signature. He's more or less unmovable, though he is friendly. He has already heard from lots and lots of people from the net about this. His claim is more or less this: the stated section of the law is intended more to get communications providers to help with the tapping of things like Cellular Phones and the like, which he claims is now difficult. (All of us on the net, of course, know you can tap a cellular phone with a radio scanner and some patience, but never mind that). He also claims that they understand that there are technical reasons making the provisioning of back doors into cryptosystems difficult, and that is the reason for the "sense of congress" thing. He also claims that this is not the proverbial crack in the dike, and that the Senator has no intention of following through with additional legislation to enforce a ban on non-tappable cryptosystems. Personally, I have no idea whether to believe him. My gut says, never trust a politico, and that he is trying to sell me a bridge. Thats not the part that matters, though. The part that matters is whether or not we can still do something to stop this clause from getting through. My suggestion is that we, the UseNetters, organize an attempt to get S.266 Section 2201, and S.618 Section 545, discussed in a congressional hearing. My suggestion: Call up as many of the following Senators as you can. (Maybe you can leave out Biden, he's probably useless at this point.) Ask to speak to an actual human on their staff for a few minutes; don't just register a complaint with a random bill. Say something like "I'd like to speak to a member of the senators staff about a bill coming before the Judiciary committee that I am very concerned about." When you get someone, calmly and quietly tell them why you oppose S.266 section 2201 and S.618 section 545. (the wording in both is identical, and be sure to mention that the two sections are identical). Explain to them that there are lots of other people who think the same way and tell them you would like to see hearings held where people who are members of prominent organizations like the Electronic Freedom Foundation, the ACLU, and other similar groups would be given a chance to oppose the section. Be nice; these men are the ones who we have to count on to rescue us. (Gawd help us all!) Here, again, is the text of what we are opposing, which is identical in both S.266 sec. 2201 and S.618 sec. 545: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COOPERATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT It is the sense of Congress that providers of electronic communications services and manufacturers of electronic communications service equipment shall ensure that communications systems permit the government to obtain the plain text contents of voice, data, and other communications when appropriately authorized by law. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will be acting on these bills, are: Chair: Joeseph R. Biden, Delaware Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Howard M. Metzenbaum, Ohio Dennis DeConcini, Arizona Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Howell Heflin, Alabama Paul Simon, Illinois Herbert Kohl, Wisconsin Strom Thurmond, South Carolina Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Alan K. Simpson, Whyoming Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Hank Brown, Colorado The phone number of the U.S. Senate Switchboard, which will get you any of these men's staff's, is... (202)-224-3121 Their specific numbers and addresses are... DEMOCRATS: Senator Joseph Biden (Del) Suite 221 Russell Building U.S. Senate, Washington DC 20510 <-- for all of them (202) 224-5042 Senator Edward Kennedy Suite 315 Russell Building (202) 224-4543 Senator Howard Metzenbaum (Ohio) Suite 140 Russell (202) 224-2315 Senator Dennis DeConcini (Arizona) Suite 328 Russell (202) 224-4521 Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont) Suite 433 Russell (202) 224-4242 Senator Howell Heflin (Alabama) Suite 728 Russell (202) 224-4124 Senator Paul Simon (Illinois) Suite 462 Dirksen Building (202) 224-2152 Senator Herber Kohl (Wisconsin) Suite 702 Russell (202) 224-5653 REPUBLICANS: Senator Strom Thurmond (South Carolina) Suite 218 Russell (202) 224-5972 Senator Orrin Hatch (Utah) Suite 135 Russell (202) 224-5251 Senator Alan Simpson (Wyo) Suite 261 Dirksen Bldg (202) 224-3424 Senator Charles Grassley (Louisiana) Suite 135 Hart Bldg (202) 224-3744 Senator Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania) Suite 303 Hart Bldg (202) 224-4254 Senator Hank Brown (Colorado) ??? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Perry Metzger "Live Free or Die"