[Faxed to the subcommittee by Carl Ellison, prior to the joint hearings on the Digital Telephony proposal, Mar. 18, 1994] To: Subcommittee on Technology and the Law; Senate Judiciary cc: Senators Kennedy and Kerry; Representative Kennedy A Need for Protection of our Rights Two agencies of the Executive branch, the FBI and NSA, have been trying to arrogate to themselves a right which they have never been granted and which would be against the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution if it could be granted. It is vital for the Congress to act decisively to protect our rights in this current onslaught and to preserve those rights against future attempts. The right they are claiming is the right to succeed at surveillance. They have never been given this right. They have the right and maybe even the mandate to attempt surveillance in certain carefully limited circumstances but they do not have a right to succeed at that surveillance. The former enables these agencies to engage in certain behaviors. The latter would restrict American citizens from engaging in certain behaviors (such as speaking over the telephone in a language unintelligible to government eavesdroppers, using strong encryption or implementing communications equipment in the most efficient and competitive manner possible without provision for eavesdropping). To grant the requested right to these surveillance agencies would be to declare that American citizens are suspect by default -- that they can not be trusted to engage in private conversation -- that they have no right, for the first time ever, to use whatever means available to them to maintain secrets from the government. I do not claim a right to defy a court order to testify or to produce papers. I do claim the right to do everything in my power to frustrate attempts to spy on me -- whether by criminal interests or government agencies. For example, I have been a user of e-mail for over twenty years and am accustomed to having my e-mail traffic both encrypted for privacy and not subject to address tracing. I intend to preserve that right and ask your help in that effort -- against the desires of the FBI. I do not have time this evening to provide a full case against the Digital Telephony Proposal but as a citizen and a designer of computer and communications equipment, I request that these surveillance agencies again be strongly informed by Congress that they do not have the right and never will have the right to succeed at surveillance at the expense of my freedom as a citizen and designer. Thank you. Carl Ellison e-mail: cme@sw.stratus.com 2130 Mass Ave #5B Home: (617) 876-6476 Cambridge MA 02140 Work: (508) 460-2783 ============================================================================== [Carl adds these comments:] Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 14:26:14 -0500 From: Carl Ellison Message-Id: <199403181926.OAA19456@galt.sw.stratus.com> The wiretap act is like telling a policeman that he has permission, if walking down the street, to look in open windows if he should see any crime being committed and to act on that information. It actually goes beyond that by saying that with a court order, the policeman is allowed to hide outside the house and look through the open window from a place of concealment and is allowed to watch anything which is criminal, but not anything else, and is allowed to go into hiding only if he can show that he believes a crime will be committed. The Clipper chip and related proposals, on the other hand, are like telling all homeowners that they are not allowed to use curtains -- because if people used curtains, then the policeman wouldn't get much information by looking in windows. ____ end ____