anonymous services

[Eric]

>But the question still remains: how will passing a law stop terrorists from
>using cryptography?

The fact that they *already have* cryptography is a problem that I don't
know how to deal with.  I think it would be a lot better if the cat was not
already out of the bag.  If A send to B an encrypted message, is there a way
to block transport?  Are there intelligence tools that can detect when an
apparent string of random characters is really PGP?  I dunno.

>A terrorist, by definition, would ignore the very laws
>that are passed in the country they are attacking.

True, but would corporations that sell crypto ignore laws?  Are fewer crypto
tools better than more?  The cat is already out of the bag with respect to
some crypto tools already in possession.  Not sure what to do about that.
See above.  Last night I sent a file to my girlfriend's e-mail, and then I
sent her an unencrpted jpeg second.  The jpeg made it to her in about 5
minutes, while the pgp file took almost an hour.  Why is that?  Made me
think "someone" had noticed it.  Just guessing.  The point is that maybe
such things can be blocked.  Don't know though.  Maybe there are other
solutions.  Are there any cryptographers on this list put aside the
Libertarian slant :) and say?

>So by passing a law that
>prevents the law abiding populace from using secure communication (thereby
>eliminating all secure communication in the country) would expose those
that
>are using secure communications as terrorists, would it not?

I guess so, but what I interpret you to be saying here is an argument in
favor of crypto restriction.

>Following this assumption then, the statement that the NSA makes saying
that
>"cryptography restricts their ability to fight terrorism" is inaccurate;
>rather, it's the underlying background noise of the general populace's use
>of cryptography that restricts their ability to fight terrorism.

I guess so, but I thought you were against crypto restriction.  What I
interpret you to be saying here is, to me, an argument in favor of
restriction.

It's a new ball-game now.  I am willing to forfeit liberty in order to be
"safe." Apparently some crypt buffs would rather die than be safe.  I am on
a crypto list, and I have heard people say just that.  It's crazy to me.
They talk like people are free if crypto is unregulated, and people are not
free if it is regulated.  In my view, I am pretty free whehter or not crypto
is regulated.