Criminalizing crypto criticism

[David Jablon]

At 07:13 PM 7/25/01 -0400, Matt Blaze wrote:
>(Fortunately, as far as I know WEP isn't used for copy protection,
>so it's still legal to disseminate and traffic in this kind
>of information...)
>
>-matt

A strange thought,

With these great new laws, there is no longer any risk of being legally
criticised for using even the most glaringly flawed cryptography -- just use it
for Copy Protection, and TADA!  Negative criticism magically disappears.
Almost by definition.

Flaws can only be exposed by those who won't show their work,
or from anonymous sources, who nobody will trust without confirmation
from named reputable sources, or from those who risk going to jail,
who all must surely be disreputable crackpots.

So, I suppose we should be happy that we've removed those nasty costs
associated with developing, marketing, and deploying absolutely perfect crypto,
and on a shoestring budget, to boot. It's a no brainer.  Everything works!
You say it's broken?  You must be mistaken.  I dare you to show me how.

Yet, on a sad note, public crypto research has to stop.
One might think it could survive in purely academic circles.
But no, you'd have to be a fool to criticise even an academic paper.
Anybody, perhaps the resentful author, could co-opt the work for 
Copy Protection, and off to jail you go.

We seem to be entering the twilight zone -- the end of an exciting,
but brief era -- of public cryptography.

-- David




---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at wasabisystems.com