Email petition to oppose "Clipper"

Subject: Email petition to oppose "Clipper"
From: Rebecca <rnaffziger -at- QUALCOMM -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 10:16:36 -0700

I thought that this might be of interest to you.--Rebecca Naffziger

>>Comments by: Bill Thomassen -at- BusinessAffairs@CCC
>>Originally To: Bill Thomassen -at- BusinessAffairs@CCC, Darin Blackman -at- ComputerSvcs
>>Original Date: Tuesday, March 1, 1994 at 7:58:25 am PST
>>Originally From: Nathalie Ferrero -at- InstSrvs@OCC
>>This is a very important, albeit negative, feature of Clinton's "Information
>>Please read this and, if you agree that Clipper is a really bad idea, please
>>register your vote as the attachment describes.
>>Comments by: Nathalie Ferrero -at- InstSrvs@OCC
>>Originally To: KIDSPHERE, Subscribers, <kidsphere -at- vms -dot- cis -dot- pitt -dot- edu>
>>Original Date: Monday, February 28, 1994 at 11:41:35 pm PST
>>Originally From: KIDSPHERE Mailing List <kidsphere -at- vms -dot- cis -dot- pitt -dot- edu>
>>Since you know more about Clipper and its potential, I thought you might be
>>interested in this petition that is "circulating."
>>-------------------------[Original Message]--------------------------
>>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 18:18:10 -0700 (MST)
>>From: JESMITH -at- starburst -dot- uscolo -dot- edu
>>Subject: Clipper
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 1994 13:07:43 -0600 (UTC -06:00)
>>To: ABRAMS -at- FALCON -dot- CC -dot- UKANS -dot- EDU
>> For those of you who don't know, Clipper is a proposal circulating in the
>> government right now whereby the government will require that all methods of
>> encrypting data (including e-mail) have a 'backdoor' of sorts so that the
>> government will be able to decrypt and read any electronic mailing.
>> Below are details on a petition against Clipper, and how to sign your name
>> to it. Please read.
>> -Todd (signe)
>> Electronic Petition to Oppose Clipper
>> Please Distribute Widely
>> On January 24, many of the nation's leading experts in cryptography
>> and computer security wrote President Clinton and asked him to
>> withdraw the Clipper proposal.
>> The public response to the letter has been extremely favorable,
>> including coverage in the New York Times and numerous computer and
>> security trade magazines.
>> Many people have expressed interest in adding their names to the
>> letter. In response to these requests, CPSR is organizing an
>> Internet petition drive to oppose the Clipper proposal. We will
>> deliver the signed petition to the White House, complete with the
>> names of all the people who oppose Clipper.
>> To sign on to the letter, send a message to:
>> Clipper -dot- petition -at- cpsr -dot- org
>> with the message "I oppose Clipper" (no quotes)
>> You will receive a return message confirming your vote.
>> Please distribute this announcement so that others may also express
>> their opposition to the Clipper proposal.
>> CPSR is a membership-based public interest organization. For
>> membership information, please email cpsr -at- cpsr -dot- org -dot- For more
>> information about Clipper, please consult the CPSR Internet Library -
>> FTP/WAIS/Gopher CPSR.ORG /cpsr/privacy/crypto/clipper
>> =====================================================================
>> The President
>> The White House
>> Washington, DC 20500
>> Dear Mr. President:
>> We are writing to you regarding the "Clipper" escrowed encryption
>> proposal now under consideration by the White House. We wish to
>> express our concern about this plan and similar technical standards
>> that may be proposed for the nation's communications infrastructure.
>> The current proposal was developed in secret by federal agencies
>> primarily concerned about electronic surveillance, not privacy
>> protection. Critical aspects of the plan remain classified and thus
>> beyond public review.
>> The private sector and the public have expressed nearly unanimous
>> opposition to Clipper. In the formal request for comments conducted
>> by the Department of Commerce last year, less than a handful of
>> respondents supported the plan. Several hundred opposed it.
>> If the plan goes forward, commercial firms that hope to develop
>> new products will face extensive government obstacles. Cryptographers
>> who wish to develop new privacy enhancing technologies will be
>> discouraged. Citizens who anticipate that the progress of technology
>> will enhance personal privacy will find their expectations
>> unfulfilled.
>> Some have proposed that Clipper be adopted on a voluntary basis
>> and suggest that other technical approaches will remain viable. The
>> government, however, exerts enormous influence in the marketplace, and
>> the likelihood that competing standards would survive is small. Few
>> in the user community believe that the proposal would be truly
>> voluntary.
>> The Clipper proposal should not be adopted. We believe that if
>> this proposal and the associated standards go forward, even on a
>> voluntary basis, privacy protection will be diminished, innovation
>> will be slowed, government accountability will be lessened, and the
>> openness necessary to ensure the successful development of the
>> nation's communications infrastructure will be threatened.
>> We respectfully ask the White House to withdraw the Clipper
>> proposal.
>> Yours truly,
>> Will
>> \\\' , / //
>> \\\//, _/ //,
>> \_-//' / //<,
>> \ /// <//` /
>> / \\\`__/_
>> /,)-^ _\` \\\
>> (/ \\ //\\
>> // _//\\\\
>> ______________________________((`_((__________________________________
>> | Stephen Thomas Carson |
>> ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>> | Mr America |
>> |____________________________________________________________________|

Previous by Author: multiple indexes (an existential query)
Next by Author: Document scanning and retrieval system
Previous by Thread: International Professional Interest Committee
Next by Thread: tan: bold vs. bald

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads