[Cryptography] US Congress Vows To Criminalize First Amendment in re Paris

[Phillip Hallam-Baker]

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin Kreuter <brk7bx at virginia.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-11-22 at 16:06 -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Bystroushaak
>> <bystrousak at kitakitsune.org> wrote:
>> > Related: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/20/clinton_silicon_valley/
>>
>> She appears to be saying she is backing crypto controls but when you
>> look at what she actually says, she is saying nothing that isn't
>> obvious.
>
> What she is saying is that cryptographers should work with the
> government -- as if that did not happen already.  Quite a few big names
> in cryptography research published work on back doors and key escrow
> systems.

So she is demanding we do something we are doing already and you are
getting upset?


> Cryptographers generally agree on the conclusion of all that research:
>
>> Yep, we have told the US govt that no compromise exists. There is no
>> pixie dust technology that allows the good guys to read the bad guys
>> communications.
>
> For Mrs. Clinton it makes absolutely no difference whether or not any
> research has been done.  All she needs is a chance to display her
> leadership skills, and what better chance than two groups of people who
> fundamentally disagree on an important issue (at least according to the
> narrative told by the media)?  She is trying to be the voice of reason
> and score a few votes.

Which is currently her job.

But right now she is also setting a rather low bar for us to cross in
order to declare the encryption issue settled.

I am quite happy working with the feds on next gen crypto. I can show
them how to avoid that problem they were having with Snowden and
Manning.


I have the Mesh running and I am itching to release a demo. But I am
not going to pour fuel on that particular fire right now.