[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

!!! FBI wants to ban the Bible and smiley faces !!!

Note:  The topic of this article from RISKS is far from funny, but Ron
Rivest managed to make an amusing twist on the issue.  Note that
Mr. Rivest is the "R" in "RSA", easily the most popular public-key
cryptographic algorithm in use today.

------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 97 21:43:23 EDT
From: [email protected] (Ron Rivest)
Subject: !!! FBI wants to ban the Bible and smiley faces !!!

Congress is apparently considering legislation that would make it illegal to
post portions of the Bible on the Internet.  FBI Director Louis Freeh wants
to make it illegal to use secret codes on the Internet that the FBI can't
break, and some members of Congress have been drafting legislation in
support of Freeh's position.  However, such a law might have startling
consequences.

A recent best-selling book, "The Bible Code," claims that the Bible is full
of secret messages and codes.  These messages are only partially decoded so
far.  If true, the proposed legislation would make it illegal to post the
Bible on the Internet, unless someone provides the FBI with a way to decode
all of these secret messages contained within the Bible.

Another consequence would require you to register your "smiley faces" with
the FBI.  It is common to use smiley faces to convey meanings.  For example,
the face ;-) is usually interpreted as a "wink".  (If you haven't seen such
smiley faces before, just rotate them ninety degrees.)  Such smiley faces
are an example of a "substitution code", where one symbol (such as ;-) ) is
substituted for another (such as "wink").  Substitution codes are a classic
cryptographic technique.  The proposed law would require you to register
your list of smiley faces with the FBI.  Otherwise, the FBI might have no
way of figuring out what *you* think symbols such as 8-) or :-( might mean.

	;-)

Ron Rivest

P.S., The proposed language would appear to ban the sale of all computers,
since they are products "that can be used to encrypt communications or
electronic information...".  Ron

  [You think this is early April Fools'?  WRONG.  Think again.  This is 
  just a hint of some VERY SERIOUS stuff.  There are many concerned people
  in the computer security community and in the privacy community who
  believe that most of the U.S. populace will be the Fools if the newly
  proposed legislation goes through.  If you want more background, read my
  Senate testimony from 9 Jul 1997
    <http://www.csl.sri.com/neumann/judiciary.html>
  and my follow-up responses, 2 Sep 1997, to questions from Senators
  Thurmond, Grassley, Leahy, and Feinstein, directed at panelists by Senator
  Hatch,
    <http://www.csl.sri.com/neumann/judiciary-ans.html>
  which I wrote *before* the newly proposed legislation was introduced, and 
  which seems even more relevant now.  The newly proposed legislation seems
  even more draconian than the earlier McCain-Kerrey bill in the Senate: 
  MANDATORY KEY RECOVERY in sheep's clothing.  PGN]
------- End of forwarded message -------
===
This message was sent to mph-humor.  No guarantees of actual humor are
provided.  Archives and instructions for subscribing or unsubscribing
are available from http://mph124.rh.psu.edu/~hunt/humor .