RE: [Raven] And it ought to be remembered that there is...

[Chris Savage <chris.savage@crblaw.com>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: chefren [mailto:chefren@pi.net]
>Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 1:35 PM
>To: raven@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: [Raven] And it ought to be remembered that there is...
>
>
>On 13 Apr 00, at 13:09, Chris Savage wrote:
>
>> So I think the invocation of Machiavelli is very appropriate.  His
>> observations relate to the (potential) behavior of both 
>> private citizens and those holding (or seeking) power.  
>
>Hm, I tried to use his words to describe why Raven and IETF 
>failed to bring something new and more useful to this 
>world...

Well, I guess I disagree with you there.  What is "new" to the world is
strong encryption widely available to the citizenry.  But the effect of
strong encryption isn't new; instead, it puts things as between government
and citizen back to the way things were in pre-modern-technological times,
in a sense.  Pre-telephone, pre-microphones, pre-radio, when two people
spoke to each other, with a few reasonable precautions, they could be
reasonably confident that no one was listening in.  Telephones, etc. have
created a situation where the reverse is true: most people *assume* they are
not being listened to, but have no way of knowing.  With strong encryption,
again, people can be reasonably certain that they aren't being "listened" to
(I know I'm eliding conversation and text here, but you get my point).

>I still wonder why it is so difficult to explain here that 
>free use of strong encryption inevitably will bring us law 
>enforcement virtually sitting on our desks and tables at 
>home.

I disagree with this, too, at least the "inevitably" part.  Certainly the
availability of strong encryption will create pressures on law enforcement
to be more aggressive about other ways of learning what it needs to learn to
do its job.  Some of those ways will be acceptable to people, others won't.
The availability of strong encryption, combined with whatever law
enforcement ends up being permitted to do in response to it, will in various
indirect ways affect the nature and extent of various types of crime.  If
people don't like the result, then they may change their net/collective
response to the availability of strong encryption.  The law enforcement
approaches, practical civil liberties, crime rates, and the availability of
strong encryption are all part of a complex adaptive system called
"society."  None of us really has a clue what will happen at all, much less
"inevitably" happen.

Chris S.


*************************************************************************** 
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or 
privileged information.  If you believe that you have received the 
message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission 
and delete the message without copying or disclosing it. 
***************************************************************************

_______________________________________________
raven mailing list
raven@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven