Crypto Advocate Under FBI Investigation (For Treason)

["Dr. Jai Maharaj" <jai at mantra.com>]

Crypto Advocate Under FBI Investigation

Windows NT Magazine

Tuesday, November 30, 1999 - We recently published a
story regarding cryptography and IPv6, where somseone at
the Department of Justice accused Scott Bradner,

http://www.ntsecurity.net/go/2c.asp?f=/news.asp?IDF=167&TB=news

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) area coordinator,
of an anti-social act by trying to get encryption
inserted into the new protocol. Later, at an IETF meeting
where votes were taken for IPv6 encryption inclusion,
Fore System's Brian Rosen brazenly claimed that
regardless of any encryption inclusion, Fore systems
would proceed by including back doors

http://www.ntsecurity.net/go/2c.asp?f=/news.asp?IDF=177&TB=news

into any included encryption technology. But the
harrassment of the IETF doesn't stop there.

Just how far will our federal government go towards
controlling strong encryption? Apparently, very far. And
this isn't a new effort by any means. We learned that
William Allen Simpson, a Detroit-based computer
consultant who was on the IETF staff, has been
investigated by the federal government for treason
charges. Simpson was the person that argued loudly for
encryption to be included in the PPP protocol when it was
still in design phases. That push landed Simpson in hot
whatever with federal officials. Simpson learned through
friends that he was under investigation for treason --
the FBI had been interviewing his friends and associates.

Simpson obtained 54 pages of documents from the
government under the Freedom of Information act, however
the documents were heavily censored, including the
bureau's basis for the investigation. According to a ZDTV
report,

http://www.zdnet.com/zdtv/cybercrime/chaostheory/story/0,3700,2398590,00.html

Simpson did learn that the FBI had accused him of
"challenging authority and laws that may impinge upon his
activities."

Wait a second! Isn't that part of what the Constitution
is all about--the means to peacefully object to the laws
of the land? I think so. And if that's true, then that
certainly positions the FBI in a bad light since it would
appear their actions are counter to the Consitutional
rights. It not against the law to develop strong
cryptography, but it is against the law to export that
technology outside of proper governmental controls. The
PPP protocol did not have encryption at the time--it was
only a suggested inclusion--so why investigate a person
for doing something completely legal?

The IETF is an open public standards body that conducts
its business in clear public view. They help stear
standards that better ensure compatibility and
interoperability. So why would the FBI investigate an
IETF member just because that person suggested in a
public meeting that strong encryption be included in a
standard wide-spread protocol such as PPP?

Source - http://www.ntsecurity.net/go/2c.asp?f=/news.asp?IDF=186&TB=news

Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for
the educational purposes of research and open discussion.

Jai Maharaj
jai at mantra.com
Om Shanti