It looks innocuous enough, a partner, Stewart A. Baker from Steptoe and Johnson law firm Stewart A. Baker is nominated to help Chertoff as an Assistant Secretary for Policy at the Homeland Security Department in a major reorganization:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050713-8.html
He's got long set of credentials and represents many of the ISP (Internet Service Provider) corporations. But he's very much a big corporate and big government side policy wonk.
Rememeber the Clipper chip, key escrow rules? He has long history of supporting opposition to individual citizens having the capability of encrypting their own computer files and rights of privacy. Click on URL below the fold:
http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2Fwired%2Farchive%2F2.06%2Fnsa.clipper_pr
.html&siteId=3&oId=2100-7348-5787520&ontId=1009&lop=nl.ex
For the deeper background story:
http://news.com.com/Bush+picks+tech+lawyer+for+security+post/2100-7348_3-5787520.html?tag=nefd.top
The most omninous quote:
"For the civil liberties community, this could be a troubling appointment," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "Stu Baker often stood on the other side of important national debates on protecting privacy and preserving open government."
At this point, I'm just full of questions and a few observations. A discussion on how high technology information hiding (by citizens and government) and ethics seems in order.
The military has sought and got laws deeming encryption technology and secure communications technology a 'munition'. Mr. Baker has backed this.
With the power of computers increasing rapidly, formidable security of the present is rapidly diminished within a few years, often months. Large security key cracking is now possible by civilian groups since millions of computers can be coordinated to solve it via the internet.
Should the individual right to privacy include the right to keep encrypted secrets? Should corporations have this right as well? As Spiderman's uncle said, "With great power comes great responsibility." Is there ever too much power for an individual to wield over their personal information?
If medical records (like abortion, sex changes, etc.) were required to be encrypted, would you feel this is safer for patients?
What about membership records of extremist groups?
Should members of Congress be entitled to use encryption with the data they keep? On behalf of the American people?
Are there limits to what sort of encryption should be denied to the citizen?
How much does Democracy depend on having transparency in Government? How much transparency?
Are there limits to what the government and military should be allowed for encryption and decryption capabilities?