[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] [declan@well.com: FC: Congress considers encryption restrictions in response to attacks]
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] [declan@well.com: FC: Congress considers encryption restrictions in response to attacks]
- From: "D. C. Sessions" <dcs(at)lumbercartel.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 20:52:17 -0700
- In-Reply-To: <20010914013338.55745.qmail@web13903.mail.yahoo.com>
- Organization: ***** SPLORFFF!!! *****
- References: <20010914013338.55745.qmail@web13903.mail.yahoo.com>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
On Thursday 13 September 2001 18:33, you wrote:
> --- lists@politechbot.com wrote:
>
> > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html
>
> This just shows how utterly clueless our leaders are about security.
>
> Many different types of very strong crypto are "out there" with source code.
> Trying to ban cryptology now would be like trying to ban ice in soft drinks.
Like they could tell the difference? In order to tell that a given message was
encrypted with "bad" software instead of "good" software, they'd have to
decrypt and analyze every message. All of them. Also any graphic images,
etc. (steganography is great stuff.)
Somehow I suspect that our Lords and Masters are either not hearing this
or ignoring it anyway.
--
| I'm old enough that I don't have to pretend to be grown up.|
+----------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+