Editing Clipper chip (section)

== Other proponents ==
There were several advocates of the Clipper chip who argued that the technology was safe to implement and effective for its intended purpose of providing law enforcement with the ability to intercept communications when necessary and with a warrant to do so. Howard S. Dakoff, writing in the ''[[John Marshall Law Review]]'', stated that the technology was secure and the legal rationale for its implementation was sound.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1714&context=lawreview |title=Howard S. Dakoff, The Clipper Chip Proposal: Deciphering the Unfounded Fears That Are Wrongfully Derailing Its Implementation,29 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (1996) |access-date=2020-08-09 |archive-date=2020-10-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201017073234/https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1714&context=lawreview |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Stewart Baker]] wrote an opinion piece in ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine debunking a series of what he purported to be myths surrounding the technology.<ref>{{Cite magazine|last=Baker|first=Stewart A.|author-link=Stewart Baker|date=1994-06-01|title=Don't Worry Be Happy|magazine=Wired|url=https://www.wired.com/1994/06/nsa-clipper/|access-date=2020-08-09|issn=1059-1028}}</ref>