Cyphernomicon Top
Cyphernomicon 4.8

Goals and Ideology -- Privacy, Freedom, New Approaches:
Privacy Issues


    4.8.1. "Is there an agenda here beyond just ensuring privacy?"
           - Definitely! I think I can safely say that for nearly all
              political persuasions on the Cypherpunks list. Left, right,
              libertarian, or anarchist, there's much more to to strong
              crypto than simple privacy. Privacy qua privacy is fairly
              uninteresting. If all one wants is privacy, one can simply
              keep to one's self, stay off high-visibility lists like
              this, and generally stay out of trouble.
           - Many of us see strong crypto as the key enabling technology
              for a new economic and social system, a system which will
              develop as cyberspace becomes more important. A system
              which dispenses with national boundaries, which is based on
              voluntary (even if anonymous) free trade. At issue is the
              end of governments as we know them today. (Look at
              interactions on the Net--on this list, for example--and
              you'll see many so-called nationalities, voluntary
              interaction, and the almost complete absence of any "laws."
              Aside from their being almost no rules per se for the
              Cypherpunks list, there are essentially no national laws
              that are invokable in any way. This is a fast-growing
              trend.)
           + Motivations for Cypherpunks
             - Privacy. If maintaining privacy is the main goal, there's
                not much more to say. Keep a low profile, protect data,
                avoid giving out personal information, limit the number
                of bank loans and credit applications, pay cash often,
                etc.
             - Privacy in activism.
             + New Structures. Using cryptographic constructs to build
                new political, economic, and even social structures.
               - Political: Voting, polling, information access,
                  whistleblowing
               - Economic: Free markets, information markets, increased
                  liquidity, black markets
               - Social: Cyberspatial communities, True Names
           - Publically inspectable algorithms always win out over
              private, secret algorithms
    4.8.2. "What is the American attitude toward privacy and
            encryption?"
           + There are two distinct (and perhaps simultaneously held)
              views that have long been found in the American psyche:
             - "A man's home is his castle." "Mind your own business."
                The frontier and Calvinist sprit of keeping one's
                business to one's self.
             - "What have you got to hide?" The nosiness of busybodies,
                gossiping about what others are doing, and being
                suspicious of those who try too hard to hide what they
                are doing.
           + The American attitude currently seems to favor privacy over
              police powers, as evidenced by a Time-CNN poll:
             - "In a Time/CNN poll of 1,000 Americans conducted last
                week by Yankelovich Partners, two-thirds said it was more
                important to protect the privacy of phone calls than to
                preserve the ability of police to conduct wiretaps. When
                informed about the Clipper Chip, 80% said they opposed
                it." [Philip Elmer-Dewitt, "Who Should Keep the Keys,"
                _TIME_, 1994-03-04.]
           - The answer given is clearly a function of how the question
              is phrased. Ask folks if they favor "unbreakable
              encryption" or "fortress capabilities" for terrorists,
              pedophiles, and other malefactors, and they'll likely give
              a quite different answer. It is this tack now being taken
              by the Clipper folks. Watch out for this!
           - Me, I have no doubts.
           - As Perry Metzger puts it, "I find the recent disclosures
              concerning U.S. Government testing of the effects of
              radiation on unknowing human subjects to be yet more
              evidence that you simply cannot trust the government with
              your own personal safety. Some people, given positions of
              power, will naturally abuse those positions, often even if
              such abuse could cause severe injury or death. I see little
              reason, therefore, to simply "trust" the U.S. government --
              and given that the U.S. government is about as good as they
              get, its obvious that NO government deserves the blind
              trust of its citizens. "Trust us, we will protect you"
              rings quite hollow in the face of historical evidence.
              Citizens must protect and preserve their own privacy -- the
              government and its centralized cryptographic schemes
              emphatically cannot be trusted." [P.M., 1994-01-01]
    4.8.3. "How is 1994 like 1984?"
           - The television ad for Clipper: "Clipper--why 1994 _will_ be
              like 1984"
           + As Mike Ingle puts it:
             - 1994: Wiretapping is privacy
                      Secrecy is openness
                      Obscurity is security
    4.8.4. "We anticipate that computer networks will play a more and
            more important role in many parts of our lives.  But this
            increased computerization brings tremendous dangers for
            infringing privacy.  Cypherpunks seek to put into place
            structures which will allow people to preserve their privacy
            if they choose.  No one will be forced to use pseudonyms or
            post anonymously. But it should be a matter of choice how
            much information a person chooses to reveal about himself
            when he communicates.  Right now, the nets don't give you
            that much choice.  We are trying to give this power to
            people."  [Hal Finney, 1993-02-23]
    4.8.5. "If cypherpunks contribute nothing else we can create a real
            privacy advocacy group, advocating means of real self-
            empowerment, from crypto to nom de guerre credit cards,
            instead of advocating further invasions of our privacy as the
            so-called privacy advocates are now doing!" [Jim Hart, 1994-
            09-08]
  

Next Page: 4.9 Education Issues
Previous Page: 4.7 Free Speech Issues

By Tim May, see README

HTML by Jonathan Rochkind