Joe Biden tried to ban email encryption back in 1991

Post by declan » Sun, Dec 30, 2012, 8:08 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #23

declan wrote: post #20

I wrote about this four years ago when Obama chose Biden as his running mate: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10024163-38.html Note one House committee did vote in the 1990s to ban the "manufacture, distribution, or import of any encryption product that did not include a back door for the federal government," but that bill failed to become law: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20032910-281.html Excerpts: Biden's b…

You wrote about this incorrectly; you cited Biden's language, which begins "It is the sense of Congress that", and then wrote "Translated, that means turn over your encryption keys", which it plainly does not mean, because sense-of-the-Senate language doesn't create law. Then, you wrote "Joe Biden made his second attempt to introduce such legislation in the form of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Ac…

Post by kabdib » Sun, Dec 30, 2012, 8:10 PM UTC

derleth wrote: post #15

Zoophy wrote: post #5

I wish he had succeed. Digital, not just email, encryption is a threat to national security.

> I wish he had succeed. Digital, not just email, encryption is a threat to national security. Since this comment is on its way to being killed, I quoted the entirety so my response would not be deprived of context. Twenty years ago, this would have engendered actual debate. Fifteen years ago, it would have been harder to defend, but it would have found defenders. Now, of course, it's seen as utterly absurd and impos…

Post by mtgx » Sun, Dec 30, 2012, 8:11 PM UTC

kabdib wrote: post #29

Feinstein supported this, too. I wrote her a letter; her response was along the lines of "I don't care, and in any event it's good for you." Haven't voted for her since. With recent events, even though I don't live in CA any more, I plan to give her opponents money, for any election she's a candidate in.

Post by mtgx » Sun, Dec 30, 2012, 8:15 PM UTC

Kynlyn wrote: post #6

This is the kind of thing one can expect when their leaders are so far removed from the people that they govern. Joe Biden has been in office since 1973. I'd wager that's longer than many of the HN readers have even been alive. When you have politicians who have been running around in the Washington circles that long, some really bad things will come of it. So, at the time he proposed that, he had been in Washington…

Post by declan » Sun, Dec 30, 2012, 8:18 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #24

harold wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is true that sense of congress resolutions are not law, and just an 'opinion of congress'. Just for context of what Biden's opinion was at the time, here is the 'meaningless sense' that appears to have originated in his bill, S-226, from 1991. SEC. 2201. COOPERATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT. It is the sense of Congress that providers of electronic communications services and manufacture…

Again, worth noting that Biden cosponsored a bill less than a year later that (a) provided for lawful intercept of telecommunications while (b) explicitly exempting providers from a requirement to provide plaintext.