Novel new use of PGP keysigning sessions

[Brian Gladman]

From: "Peter Fairbrother" <peter.fairbrother@ntlworld.com>
To: <ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: Novel new use of PGP keysigning sessions

> > Brian Gladman at brg@gladman.plus.com wrote:
> [  ]
> >
> > No, I have made no such claims.  What I have done is to deny your claim
that
> > a machine will always perform better than a human in a specific military
> > scenario that you have previously descibed.
>
> You will be pleased to know the US military agrees with you, and all
lethal
> machines must have a human in the control loop who must authorise software
> "fire" decisions.
>
> At least that's their story, it doesn't seem to apply to mines, except
> insofar as they are laid by men and have very little software - something
> like "go bang if pressed".
>
> It does apply to nukes, Aegis, "smart" weapons, etc. though.

If I remember correctly, this was also Ministry of Defence policy at the
time I left in 1995. I assume that there must have been exceptions but my
guess is that all platform mounted weapons systems (i.e those on manned
ships, aircraft, tanks etc.) had to have a man in the firing loop in almost
all envisaged situations (I am not sure whether there were any exceptions).

I don't know what their current policy is - maybe we should ask them!

    Brian