NYT Op-Ed: An Attack on Privacy Rights

      October 3, 1997
      
An Attack on Privacy Rights

     T he Clinton Administration has proposed several unworkable plans
     over the years to keep powerful encryption programs that scramble
     telephone and computer messages out of the hands of foreign
     terrorists and criminals. But it has never tried to put the need to
     eavesdrop on criminals above the privacy rights of ordinary
     Americans. Last month the F.B.I. Director, Louis Freeh, crossed
     that line by urging Congress to outlaw the manufacture and
     distribution of encryption programs the Government cannot instantly
     crack.
     
     The House Intelligence Committee promptly passed a bill restricting
     domestically manufactured encryption products. The House Commerce
     Committee nearly followed suit, until furious lobbying by
     electronics and media companies, scientists and privacy advocates
     derailed the effort.
     
     The Intelligence Committee appears to envision programs that use
     mathematical passwords to mask sensitive communications like bank
     transfers and trade secrets. Citizens who bought such programs
     would disclose their passwords to a Government-approved body.
     
     Government could then grab the password upon presentation of a
     court order and decipher phone or computer messages without
     notifying the sender.
     
     The plan is unworkable because uncrackable encryption software is
     readily available abroad. Congress could try to forbid Americans to
     use any unbreakable encryption, regardless of who makes it. But
     that would trample on rights that Americans jealously protect to
     communicate free of Washington's interference.
     
     The best way to reduce many types of industrial and financial crime
     is to provide citizens powerful encryption so they can communicate
     without fear of corporate spies and thieves. But the House bill
     would effectively freeze encryption technology.
     
     In a threat to privacy, the bill sets a lower legal standard for
     the Government to get passwords than it must now meet to tap phone
     calls. It also calls on the United States to cooperate with foreign
     governments that may not live by American constitutional
     protections. Before encryption controls pick up more momentum, the
     White House needs to stamp out a bad idea.
     
                 Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company