ccastmg@prism.gatech.EDU (Michael G. Goldsman) (04/13/91)
Read the last few comp.risks postings... There has been an interesting discussion reguarding a drive by Senator Biden to require vendors of cytological hardware to create backdoors which law enforment officials could us to decrypt data if need be... If I had a business which dealt with a lot of sensative information, there would be no way I would buy such hardware. (I guess that would mean all software ...slow... encryption right??) It really bothers me that the government will have the power to look at anything they want to... "But Mike, if you're not doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about..." That's just a bit police-statish (is that even a word???), isn't it... Does anyone have the text of Biden's proposal?? (There is a brief excerpt in one the digests...) -Mike
truesdel@nas.nasa.gov (David A. Truesdell) (04/13/91)
ccastmg@prism.gatech.EDU (Michael G. Goldsman) writes: >There has been an interesting discussion reguarding a drive >by Senator Biden to require vendors of cytological hardware to >create backdoors which law enforment officials could us to decrypt data >if need be... >If I had a business which dealt with a lot >of sensative information, there would be no way I would >buy such hardware. (I guess that would mean all software ...slow... >encryption right??) >It really bothers me that the government will have the power to >look at anything they want to... "But Mike, if you're not >doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about..." >That's just a bit police-statish (is that even a word???), isn't it... Another reason to avoid such hardware; Any backdoor known to the police will surely end up in the hands of criminals in a very short time. You may not mind the information in the hands of the police, but in the hands of a competitor? -- T.T.F.N., dave truesdell (truesdel@nas.nasa.gov) Ita erat quando hic adventi.