[free-sklyarov] An Alternative Line of Argumentation

[Izel Sulam]

Jay Sulzberger jays at panix.com wrote:

>Here is how encryption could be denied to individuals:

Being able to tell encrypted packets apart from nonencrypted packets seems 
to me to be a very nontrivial problem. Even moreso when you have to do it 
at the rate of many millions of packets per second. Even if encrypted 
packets from a zillion different programs using a billion different 
algorithms can somehow all be reliably identified, and blocked, and no 
unencrypted packets ever mistakenly blocked in the process, there's always 
steganograpgy to fall back on.

I really wouldn't worry about encryption not being available to individuals 
anytime soon. There would be absolutely no technological means to enforce 
that sort of ban.

Besides, encryption is classified as munitions in the US, and banning 
individual access to encryption is therefore an outright violation of the 
Second Amendment. The NRA crowd would be with us on this one. I don't think 
Bush would willingly want to piss off the NRA crowd anytime soon.