Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Clipper chip
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Backlash == [[File:Sink_Clipper_campaign.gif|thumb|right|[[RSA Security]] campaigned against the Clipper chip backdoor in the so-called [[Crypto Wars]], with this poster being the most well-remembered icon of that debate.]] [[File:Cyberright.png|thumb|''Wired'' magazine's anti-Clipper graphic]] Organizations such as the [[Electronic Privacy Information Center]] and the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] challenged the Clipper chip proposal, saying that it would have the effect not only of subjecting citizens to increased and possibly illegal government [[surveillance]], but that the strength of the Clipper chip's encryption could not be evaluated by the public as its design was classified secret, and that therefore individuals and businesses might be hobbled with an insecure communications system. Further, it was pointed out that while American companies could be forced to use the Clipper chip in their encryption products, foreign companies could not, and presumably phones with strong data encryption would be manufactured abroad and spread throughout the world and into the United States, negating the point of the whole exercise, and, of course, materially damaging U.S. manufacturers en route. Senators [[John Ashcroft]] and [[John Kerry]] were opponents of the Clipper chip proposal, arguing in favor of the individual's right to encrypt messages and export encryption software.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong106/encrypt/Default.htm |title=Summary of Encryption Bills in the 106th Congress |access-date=2008-08-22 |archive-date=2018-09-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180921053251/http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong106/encrypt/Default.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> The release and development of several strong cryptographic software packages such as [[Nautilus (secure telephone)|Nautilus]], [[Pretty Good Privacy|PGP]]<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.philzimmermann.com/EN/essays/WhyIWrotePGP.html |title=Philip Zimmermann - Why I Wrote PGP (Part of the Original 1991 PGP User's Guide (updated in 1999)) |access-date=2007-12-20 |archive-date=2011-03-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110304191925/http://www.philzimmermann.com/EN/essays/WhyIWrotePGP.html |url-status=live }}</ref> and [[PGPfone]] was in response to the government push for the Clipper chip. The thinking was that if strong cryptography was freely available on the Internet as an alternative, the government would be unable to stop its use.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)