home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!gatech!nntp.msstate.edu!memstvx1!ujacampbe
- From: ujacampbe@memstvx1.memst.edu (James Campbell)
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt
- Subject: Re: A new encryption problem?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov12.232703.4060@memstvx1.memst.edu>
- Date: 12 Nov 92 23:27:03 -0600
- References: <1060.517.uupcb@grapevine.lrk.ar.us>
- Distribution: world
- Organization: Memphis State University
- Lines: 65
-
- In article <1060.517.uupcb@grapevine.lrk.ar.us>,
- jim.wenzel@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (Jim Wenzel) writes:
-
- > I have been reading this newsgroup for several weeks with keen
- > interest. And for one am in favor of the privacy that it permits.
- > However, recently (yesterday) I had the opportunity to speak with a
- > law enforcement official who had quite a different view.
- >
- > He was calling from California in order to pick up the pgp program
- > from us. Seems that they are on the case of a molestor who encrypted
- > his information using PGP. If they can't crack it the molestor will
- > more than likely walk due to lack of evidence. This has caused me
- > some concern because we have agreed (volunteered) to be a
- > distribution site for PGP (logon as PGP USER pw: PGP). Yet, I for
- > one would hate to think that there is anyway we could help such scum
- > in receiveing PGP or similar encryption technology.
- >
- > At this point I am curious as to what others think. Both about
- > distribution and about it's use by the underworld. I have read
- > 'Dennings' report and though I disagree with it on several points
- > this particular case does raise some real-life issues pertinent to
- > the discussion. If a law was to be passed (and you can bet that if
- > cases like this one in particular continue one will be) how would
- > you like it to read?
- >
- > * Jim Wenzel, SysOp, The GrapeVine BBS, (501) 753-8121 5.6 gigs *
-
- Well, Jim, I have a few questions for the "California law enforcement
- official" the next time he calls your BBS:
-
- 1) Why did he have to call Little Rock when just about any university in
- California could have FTP'ed a copy for him, and many California BBS's
- carry PGP20 and PGP20SRC?
- 2) How can he have identified the guy as a molestor (not "alleged molestor")
- when the ONLY evidence against the guy is in PGP-encrypted files?
- 3) How does he even know that the files contain such evidence?
- 4) If he doesn't have PGP yet, how does he know the files are PGP-encrypted?
- 5) What kind of records do molestors keep anyway? Having never been one, I
- wouldn't know, but I'd guess that such a "profession" would not feel a
- crying need for accurate books.
-
- Also, I wouldn't worry about the distribution aspect on this one, Jim.
- Since the "molester" probably would have used the -c option to encrypt his
- own files (why use a public/private pair?), he could have just as easily,
- and as effectively, used any public-domain implementation of the DES to
- serve his fiendish purposes. And the DES has been available for MS-DOS
- machines for years.
-
- -----SOAPBOX MODE ON-----
-
- To answer your question, though, I really think it's a non-issue. I
- mean, I'm sure the only records that most molestors keep are mental. Should
- we pass a law that all citizens must keep a permanent written record of any
- "perverse" thought that crosses their minds, so even sex offenders will
- leave a paper trail to facilitate prosecution? Neither should encryption
- be limited for that reason. Besides, what kind of crime would leave its
- ONLY evidence locked in the perp's head or in his ciphertext files?
-
- -----SOAPBOX MODE OFF-----
-
- +----------------------------+--------------------------------+
- | James A Campbell | ujacampbe@memstvx1.memst.edu |
- | Math Sciences Department | PGP 2.0 Public Key Available |
- | Memphis State University | (Not that I use it, myself!) |
- +----------------------------+--------------------------------+
-