Article View: sci.crypt
Article #1652Re: Limits on the Use of Cryptography?
From: Terry Ritter
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:04
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:04
47 lines
2631 bytes
2631 bytes
In <1992Nov12.160033.26502@rchland.ibm.com> lwloen@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Larry Loen) writes: >I think there is no need for a new law >at all. I am not a legal expert, but I think that only information >in one's own brain is exempt from involuntary surrender. Else, why >have search warrants in the first place? It is one thing to be forced to surrender ciphertext, and quite another to be forced, under criminal penalty, to surrender the associated plaintext. The point of this would be the ability to convict someone who will not and *can* not afford to reveal the plaintext because of greater penalty. Many people (not so many here, of course) believe there *is* a need for a new law. Abstractly, I would prefer that everybody be free to do everything; I find myself in the unfortunate position that these desires are limited by reality. In practice, it seems to be necessary to have some limits and controls to allow society to stumble along. I have never had the experience of being searched under a warrant; I expect that I would take it as an invasion of my privacy. But the reality is that such an "invasion" is *our heritage* under common law. Moreover, I am not aware that due-process search is an active civil rights or personal freedom issue. Can we really expect to avoid this accepted part of our heritage simply because we have a new technology that makes that possible? I expect that if we wish to eliminate the use of warrants we will have to confront that issue directly in a political forum. Computer cryptography makes it possible for those who accumulate information to avoid the due-process search which is expected when people accumulate things. >But, whatever the state of the law actually is, I don't see any >reason that cryptography requires any _special_ treatment. It just >isn't really different than a wall safe. The difference is that what was once rare and easily breached by the authorities is now on its way to becoming common and impenetrable. Cryptography really is different from a wall safe. --- Terry Ritter ritter@cactus.org
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Nov12.230445.25742@cactus.org>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!know!cass.ma02.bull.com!mips2!news.bbn.com!usc!cs.utexas.edu!milano!cactus.org!ritterReferences:
<1992Nov11.061210.9933@cactus.org> <1992Nov12.160033.26502@rchland.ibm.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!know!cass.ma02.bull.com!mips2!news.bbn.com!usc!cs.utexas.edu!milano!cactus.org!ritter From: ritter@cactus.org (Terry Ritter) Newsgroups: sci.crypt Subject: Re: Limits on the Use of Cryptography? Message-ID: <1992Nov12.230445.25742@cactus.org> Date: 12 Nov 92 23:04:45 GMT References: <1992Nov11.061210.9933@cactus.org> <1992Nov12.160033.26502@rchland.ibm.com> Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx Lines: 47