

As usual, David Sternlight is demonstrating his inability to read. The
proposal clearly states:

=> The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
=> accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
=> telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.

It speaks about telecommunications in general. Read it again, David.
Maybe you'll understand it the next time... Nah, probably not.


That's exactly what the government wants all sheep-minded people to
think. Let's look at the current situation. It allows to almost
anybody to eavesdrop almost everybody, unless secure (and I mean
secure) encryption is used. What will happen when ("if"? Ha!
optimists...) the new proposal gets accepted? Almost nobody EXCEPT
SOME will be able to eavesdrop everybody else, but the ability of
these "some" to eavesdrop will be guaranteed! The proposal emphasizes
on the former ("almost nobody") - which is clearly an improvement -
and "forgets" to mention the drawbacks of the latter ("guaranteed").
Yes, my statement assumes that the next step will be to make the
strong crypto unlawful. You think that it will not happen? Good luck.


It's not just "continued ability". It's -guaranteed- ability.


Yeah, that's exactly what your government wants you to think. Let's
take small steps, one at a time. Concentrate on the current one, don't
think about the future. Trust us.


It's not asked because the proposal clearly says that this is the
intention. They, unlike you, read what they write.


Yes, it will. It will stop the jerk who is eavesdropping now. It will
allow only to the government to eavesdrop. (If the scheme is secure,
of course, which is yet to be proven.) But how do you know that the
jerk you are fearing now will not get a government job tomorrow? The
new proposal -guarantees- him the ability to eavesdrop then. Hell,
that will even motivate him to get that job - if he indeed is that
mentally pervert...


Great. The Greatest Cryptographer of All Times David Sternlight (tm)
has succeeded to evaluate the new system in the absense of any
details whatsoever and has concluded that it is "highly secure". I
guess, that comes from the background of working some 50 years for the
two major crypto evaluating companies, right? Gee, now the government
can save all that money and trouble to ask a secret council of crypto
experts to secretly analyse the new secret method - for David
Sternlight has already done all the job for them...


"Trust us, we're from the Government and we're here to help you."


"Those who are prepared to trade their liberties for the promises of
future safety, do not deserve either." This (or something like that; I
don't have the exact quote, but the meaning is the same) has been said
by one of your great men. Maybe you should study their works more
carefully, if you have the brains to understand them, of course.


The main question is to guarantee to availability of -really- secure
cryptography to the masses. Gee, if the proposal was saying "we
guarantee that every American will still have the full right to use
any kind of encryption s/he would like and regard this proposal as
just a default, voluntary implementation", there would have been much
less opposition... For some reason, they didn't even try to promise
you that. I wonder why... Was Orwell off only by 10 years?


No, in return you get crypto that is guaranteed to be crippled.


While the above is just rumors, and while even if it is true, it is
not done -easily-, the new scheme can is guaranteed to be easily
breakable by anybody who has the two keys. It might be also breakable
by somebody who does not have them but knows the right trick. Or who
has only one of them. NSA also told you that DES is secure, why don't
you simply trust them, huh?


It is -guaranteed- to be -easily- breakable - just get the keys. It
might be even easier, but until there is some evidence, this is just a
wild speculation.


The trapdoors -are- there. In government's hands. The keys.


Legitimate? And who decides what communications are legitimate? Oh, I
guess, it's the government, right? The guys who already have the keys?
It's kinda if I have the keys from your car and I am asked to decide
who has the right to use it "legitimately"...


Impossible, since you are demonstrating the same level of incompetence
and ignorance as in the provious threads.


Unfortunately, I have yet to see you posting a technically competent
message.

Regards,
Vesselin