DEAR MR. DENNING:

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 2, 2005
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: August 10, 2000
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20505
March 24, - 1982
Mr. Peter J. Denning
Computer Sciences Department
Purdue University
West Lafaette,,,I-{idiana 47907
~S F
FILE
l.a,\.u L.'?i1'iC'~T4 3
F d"c~`yaQ~f/!v 1
Thank you for your letter of 24 February 19821 giving me
your views on the proposed revision of Executive Order 12065,
"National. Security Information."
I appreciate your interest in this subject and I believe
your views should be made available to Mr. Steven Garfinkel,
Director, Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO),
Washington, D.C. 20405. You may wish to present your views to
Mr. Garfinkel directly.
At the same time, I believe you would want to know that, in
my view, the concerns raised in your letter about the purpose and
ultimate effects of this proposed revision are largely unfounded.
The present draft revision of Executive Order 12065
represents the product of almost a year's worth of careful
consideration and examination by numerous Executive Branch
agencies. I should emphasize that neither I nor this Agency can
act as a spokesman for the revised order or for Executive Branch
policy in. this regard, since this-is a function exercised by the
NSC and the ISOO. As part of this executive order revision
process, the NSC has provided the draft revision to the Office of
Management and Budget, which is presently considering further
changes to the proposed order. Additional recommendations are
also. expected from the various Congressional committees currently
reviewing the draft order. In these circumstances, there is no
assurance that the revision as presently' drafted will remain
unchanged, or might instead be further modified before the order
is presented to the President for signature. I can assure you,
however, that the draft revision in its current form does not
intend, nor will it result in, the consequences suggested in your
letter.
U c 0 00,/3
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
 Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
Firstly, the draft order does not alter present Government
practice with respect to the classificatpionfof scientific
cutrve
technological information. Section 1-62 present
information
Order 12065 provides that "basic scientificyresearch
not clearly related to the national may not
classified." Because this provision is self-evident and merely
been
restates the clear dictates of draft Section 1. .3, it teif has specifically
deleted as unnecessary. Draft Section 1.3(a)(6)
states that "scientific and technological matters" taytbe
considered for classification only if they "reate
The damage to the national security that
national security
technologthaticalscientinformatificion
must result from disclosure of such
under draft Section 1.3(b) further will not be
information unrelated to the national security
classified.
As to Section 1-603 of present Executivrdere12065, this
section provides that a product of non-government
development may not be classified unless the governmentvacquires
a proprietary interest in the product. Again, this p
simply restates a proposition. clearly set forth in the definition
of "information" contained at draft Section 6.1(b). "Info
subject to the order is limited under thisosectionotorinforma ..ion
or material that is owned by that non-B.S. owned or
This provision adequately
controlled products will not be subject toctlassifiiation n under
the order. Moreover, the Patent Secrecy
oducts circumstances forvnational
addresses when and under what
developed inventions or products statute should
security reasons. The scheme contemplated by
not be impaired by the inclusion of an ambiguous and unnecessary
provision in the executive order on classification.
the draft order does not greatly increase the
on.
Secondly,
amount of information that will be au jest to clas ifiCaigence
Information concerning cryptology, confidential intell
in
source, or the vulnerabilities or capabilities of ceortaect
or
national security-related systems, installations,
st information which
plans, are now listed as specific categories
may be considered for classification. By proposed heser is not
additional categories of information, the prop
expanding the subject matter irea or
can be considered for class if
c related installations or projects,
ryptology, national security- cons projects,
fct --
and confidential intelligence soursExecutive Order 12065.
and actually -- classified under present
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
 Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
Information concerning cryptography and national security-related
systems or plans was, in fact, accorded special protection under
predecessor order Executive Order 11652. Certain agencies,
however, have encountered difficulty in Freedom of Information
Act litigation in fitting the above information into the existing
categories of information contained in Executive Order 12065. By
specifically listing these three additional categories of
information, the proposed order does not intend to expand the
existing universe of classifiable information, but simply to
lessen the burden that agencies face in protecting information
which clearly impacts on the national security but is not
adequately described in the existing categories of information
contained in Executive Order 12065. The addition of these
categories will simplify the task of both classification
authorities and the courts-, as clearer guidance as to the types
of information which are properly considered for classification
will be now provided.
Thus, the substantive classification standards that
information must meet prior to classification are left largely
unchanged in the proposed revision. This new order will not
significantly expand the existing universe of classifiable
information. Nor will the order permit the classification of
scientific or technological information unless this information
is owned by or produced for -- the Government, is clearly
related to the national security, and may be expected -- if
disclosed -- to cause damage to the national defense or foreign
relations of the United States.
Moreover, the draft order also leaves unchanged the public's
right to seek a declassification review immediately after the
information's creation and subsequent classification. Section
3.4 of the draft order ensures that those records which are
needed for permanent Governmental. recordkeeping or historical
research purposes, or are otherwise requested by interested
members of the public, remain available and are regularly
reviewed for declassification.
I caution again that the above comments are based on the
most recent draft our lawyers have seen -- I do not know what
changes, are in the works. But I doubt that the final document
will pick up any more restrictive elements related to your direct
concerns. .
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
 ? +- Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7
I continue to believe that this kind of dialogue between
public servants and scientists provides the best means to jointly
develop :measures that ensure essential scientific inquiry and
freedom while also protecting vital national security
interests. For this reason, I welcome your letter, and I urge
you and your colleagues to continue to seek solutions to problems
of mutual concern.
B.VR. INMAN
Admiral, U.S. Navy
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
DISTRIBUTION:
Orig -- Addressee
1 _ OGC (Attn:
l - ES
- DD.A
l - DDCI
Room 7C35)
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP87B01034R000200050001-7