REF ID: A523021 -

---99AP SECRETe 

'18P11Bm 

MJlilClWUll !'Cl\ 58 MDfBEBS OF Ai'SACt a • r-.-... 

.Report ot tbe u.x:.;v.s. CQll!Qmicat1Cll Security Coaterence, 19!53· 

l. ~ :l.ncloem.'e 18 t01W.l'C1e4 t'or your iJ:Lt'orma.tion em 

TOP SECRET 

57 

. Oeclassifi ed and approved for release by NSA on 05-14-2014 pursuant to E .0. 13526---- --
.... ·- ' 

-----------·-----------

REF ID:A523021 .. 

' 

G OHPIBBH'f'IAL • COPY"'· NO. :5.]. 

--- io Febr~~Fli 1954 {LIMITED DISTRIBUTION) 

NOTE BY THE SECRETARIES 

to the 

HOLDERS OF J.c.s. 2074/29 

(Report of the U.K./u.s. Communication ~ecurity. Conference, 1953) 

Pursuant to an agreemen'.t ·by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on 

9 February 1954, J.c.s. 2074/29 and J.c.s. 2074/30 were referred 

by SM-128-54, dated 11 February 1954, to the Armed Forces 

Security Agency Council for comment and recommendation. 

DISTRIBUTION 

Adm. 

Gen. 

Adm. 

Gen. 

Gen. 

Gen. 

Adm. 

. Adm. 

Radford (C/JCS) Ridgway (CSA) 

C2rney (CNO) 1

rwining ( CSAF) 

Lemnitzer (DC/S,P) Eddleman (Asst. C/S, 

Ga.rdner (DCNO-Op) . Burke (ACNO-Op30) 

COWFISEN13?IAL 

G-3·) 

Note to Holders of JCS 2074/29 

EDWIN H. J. CARNS, 

RICHARD H. PHILLIPS, 

Joint Secretariat. 

Gen. Partridge (DC/S-Op, Air) Gen. Thatcher (Dir. Plans, Air) 

Gen. Everest (D/JS) · Gen. Porter (DDI) Secy, JCS 

Secy,, JSSC 

Secy, JCEC 

-

·--· ·-__......--··-.... :.. ..... .- ----=-- . . ---· .. 
RFli" In:n'\?~021 

MEMO R£9ING SLIP i NEVER USE FOR APPROVALS-PPROVALS, 

CONCURRENCES, OR SIMI CTIONS 

1 NAME OR TITLE INITIALS CIRCULATE 

-- ORGANIZATION AND LOCATION DATE COORDINATION 

2 FILE 

-- INFORMATION 

8 NECESSARY ACTION 

-- NOTE AND RETURN 

4 - SEE ME 

-- SIGNATURE 

REMARKS 

5°tBe t/'5?/8 Pa per~ 

"r ;i3/- :5&Ylte ':5 

FROM NAME OR TITLE 

ORGANIZATION AND LOCATION 

DD 1~~~~095 Replaces DA AGO Form 895, 1 Apr 48, and .A.FRQ 

Form 12, 10 Nov 47, which may be used. 

. 

DATE 

TELEPHONE 
- . REF ID:A523021 

• 

1 7 It'e bruri.ry :Li 54 

kmtiED FORCES SECURITY l.GENCY COUNCIT., 

. . TO 'IHE U.S. JOINT CHIEFS OF ST.hFF 

THE PROBLEM 

' 1. To consid~r the report of the fou.t"th UK/US com:nunication security 

• 

conference held in London during October and November 1953. 

FACTS BElffiING ON '!HE PRGBLEt~ 

2. In 1950 it was a.greed to continue for the nox.t four :rear~ the series 

of UK/US communication security conferences begun thet year. .The ~eport 

under consideration covers the fourth such conferenc~, held in icndon during 

. . . 

October and November, 1953. A copy of the report .is contained in JCS 2074/29. 

3. The conference discussed and made recommendations connerring the 

following matte~s: 

a.. Replacemc:mt of the existing Combined and N.~'l'D High Grade off-line . - ------. 

-\ 

general cryptosystem; 

b •. On-line teletypewrit~r cypher machines; 

c. Spurious omissions which endanger communications security; 

d. Speech security equipments; 

e., Facsimile security equipments (CIF.n.X); 

f. Tr.?.nsmission security; 

g. Non"'.'"communica.tions t_ransmissions; 

h. Weather cryptosystems; 

i. Communie.?.tic.ns '3e.curity Dev.Jlopm.ent Programme; 

j • Exchange of equipments• end components; 

k. Effects of e.dWl.nces in electronics; 

1. Co-ordination of Crypt?gra.phic and CoPmmnica.tior.s Equipment 

Development; . 

_ m. Operating and Maintenance; 

n. Standards of 1ecurity Requirements; 

o. Future ~iaison. 

Copy // of J"f. copies 

:;;.. ... :...... 
REF ID:A523021 

•-

4. U:qder date of 9 February 1954, the British Joint Services Mis1:1i0n 

notifiGd the '3ecretary, U.S. Joint Chief's of Staff' of the u·.K. Chiefs of 

Staff ~pprovaJ. of tho subject report. 

DISCUSSION 

--- 5. Paragraph 5.a. of the report refers to 11the U.S, cryptoprincip1c 

.efilbodied in the iLFS.HM 711 • Inasnmch as Al',SAM 47B umbodies the sema pri11ciple 

as this itFSAM 7, the conference recommcndf'.tion should be changed to ri;;flect 

this fact. ilt the same time it should be noted that while the J.lt'Sii.M 7 is 

in production, the b.FS1.M 47B wiJ.l not be in full production until later 

this yea.r, the report should be clarified on this point. 

6. In paragraph 5.e. of the rep2rt :i..t is stated thnt 11 the Cn.t~-UI~-US 

JCECs have alreRdy agreed that multi-channel sub-carrier frequen~y modu.--

lation is the best method of transr,1ission for CIFl~-.-----·-". While the 

conferees had been informed prior to the conference that such an ng~ea~ent 

had been reached, this inforni.e.~ion was in error, and no combined agroem~nt 

on the subject of a transmissio~1 system for enciphered fft.csind.le e:xists. 

'lherofore, the confurence recommendation on this subjJct should .be dcl~ted • 

. 7. The conference m.~kes cartai~ recornm~ndations in p&ragraph 5.f~ of 

the report concGming tr.::·.nsmission .security. In order to iso1'-.te this 

problem from that of censorship of civil communic~tions, the report should 

be modified to show that military commtmicai;ions only e-.ro ;lnvolvod. The 

phrase "inst:.cure means" should PJ.so be more clearly defined. 

S. In raragra.ph .5.g. of the raport recommendations n.re made concerning 

security 'of Mark X IFF. Sin~e 11 SIF with IFF ¥1.a.rk X" is neither cryptographic 

-nor communication s~rnuri ty equipment it was not an e.pproprie.te subject for 

discussion at the conference. The entire confurcncc reccmrriendation on this 

subject should therefore be disapproved a~d deleted. 

9. It is concluded: 

a. 'I'tmt the conference 1·eport should be modified to reflect the 

fact thnt the sam.?. cryptoprinciplo is contr:.L1ed both in 1:.FSl+M 7 a.nd 

AFSl.M 47B, but th.."'..t the latter will not be in production until a l[.t(jr date. 

'l10P clEGft:".":'f' ------
•• REF ID:A523021 

b. That the conference rccoinmende.tion concerning e. sub-carrier 

f~cquency modulation transmission systom for combined use ~th en~ 

ciphered facsimile ( CIFI:..X) should be deleted. 

c. That the conference reco!!Dil1:mdation concerning tre.ns.rnissio;n 

security should be modified to indicate clearly that .military c9ru1111mi,.. 

cr.tions only a.re involved,. and also more cle#\rly to define insecure 

transmission means. 

d. That the conference reco~endation concerning use of SIF with 

IfF ¥w.r~ X should be disapproved and doleted from the report, 

RECOJYiJyJENDA TIONS. 

10. It is reconnn.ended: 

a. That the foregoing conclusions be approved. 

b. Th~t the conference report be approved except for the matters 

covered in the fore going conclusions. 

c~ That a memorandum substantially as iri enclosure 11 1~ 11 hereto bo 

forwP.rded to the representativ~ of the British Chiefs of Staff. 

d. Thcn.t a. memore.n5furn subst..,ntiall;r as in enclosl,lre 11B11 h13reto be 

forrN"arded to the Director, NPJ;;ion."'!.l Security i~gency.-

• 

'POP :ffiG!i£T 
• 

REF ID:AS23021 

• 

ENcr.oStm.E "A 11 

----·~ 

1. The United States Joint Chiefs of Staff approve, with the uu.nor 

exceptions noted below, the report- of the UK/US Commun:i..cations 8e:cu-rit~r 

Conference 19 53 • 

2. It is recommended that the report be changed as follows:· 

a •• Paragre.ph 5 .a., in first sentence of the text the term 11A1r'SAM. 7 11 

.. should read "AF?JW; 7 and A:F'S.AM 47B", and the words 11 t:-ie ·fc,rmerll shodd 

be inserted before the phi'.ase "now in production in tlle · U .s.A. 11 In 

the last sentence the term 111\.FSAM 7" should read 11Al?SAM 7 and AFSP.U 47B11 • 

These changes are recommended inasmuch as the sciJD.C cr·rpto;iriuciple i c:i 

embodied in both AFSAM 7 and .A.FS.ti.M 4 7B. 

b. P~ragraph 5.ec, delete _all after the !'irst senten~e 0f the te"'Ct 

inasmuch as the C.AN-UK-US JCECs have not yet rel'l.chcd agreement on a 

transmission system for enciphered facsimile. It is regretted th~t the 

conferees were provided ~ncorrect information on tnis poi~t~ 

.· 

c. Paragraph 5 .f., first sentence, inaert, the wo:-:"d 11mi ll tary·il hetween the words "unclassif:l.ed" ·and 11messa.gesll, in order clearly to 

·--

isolate the problem from the problem of civil communications, which is 

essen:tially ~ matte;r- of ~ensorship. Also, in the sarae ~entbnce, .insert 

parenthetically the phrase "(radio and sensitive wirt:J circ;:uits) 11 l•etween the words "insecure" e.nd 11mtians 11 • This change tr.:i.11 more clearly 

expresR the intent of the wording. 

3.· The U.S. view is that the H'F ]/iark X system with Sulectivs Iden.-

tification Feature is neithe:, cryptogre.phic nor communications security 

enuipment and that it was not an approprir~te subject for discussion at· 

this COHfe· •ence. The U.S. J 'Ji nt. Chieff:I Of St.aff "t;her0fo:ce uisapprova t11e 

recommendations of peragraph 5.g. and recommend t,he deletion of all. but; 

the ~irst three sentences. 

4. The United States J:int Chiefs of Staff "\"1.sh to express their 

satisfe.ction with the result of t-hd 1153 conference, <:!Specially the 

_,_......,_ TDP ~~QH.E~ Enclosure 11A11 

- - - . - -- -: -..::-.·--~~ 

,. 
REF ID: A523021 e 

' E>,greem·<·nts reached on the problem of replacing the .0xisting combuwd ~:ncl. " . 

NA~O High Gr~de off-line cryptos;vstefil. Ev~ry possible action is being 

taken to implement the replacement of this g~nr~ral cryptosystom. 

5., Fer the next conference, to be held in Washington, tho United 

States Joint Chiefs of Staff suggest that the opening date be ns agreed 

between the Dit"e-ctor, National Sectu1ity Agency, and the Chairman, Cyph:Jr· 

Policy Board. 

Enclostire 11A" 
REF ID:A523021 

ENGLOSURE. __ ..._ __ 11B_ 11 

].rn:lviORANJill"I: It'OH THE iJIRi!iC TOR, -N,~ 'T'IOJ:Ti.T"~s··,,cnprr#.T-1. "r."i''l\J-;;--Y ..:1.... -'3A•.J -.:J U.i.. .L J. .,•_ -.q1;. V 

---------~-·-·· 

• 

1. Th.0 U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff hnve considered the report of thG 

UK/US Communications Security Conference 1953. A cop;y- of a memorandum 

tc the Representatives of the British Chie.t's of Staff on thi"s subject is 

attached hereto as e.nclosuro 11A11 • 

Enclosure 11B11 
• 

REF ·1n~A523021 

• Sar 0001QP20 

17 February 1954 

AmrED FORCE.S SECURITY i.GENCY C9UNCIJ ... 

•, 

REPORT 

TO THE U.S. JOINT Cigfili'S OF STAFF 

THE.PROBLEM 

1. To consider the report of the .fourth UK/US communication security 

conference held in London during October and November 1953, 

FACTS BEJiliJliG ~~ THE PH.OBT .. EM 

·~. In 1950 it was agreed to continue for the noxt four :rears 'the series 

of DK/US communication security"conference~ begun thet yee.r, The report 

under consideration covers the fourth. sutjl conference, held in Londo~ d~ring 

October and November, 1953. A copy of th~ report is contained in JCS 2074/29~ 

3, The confe~ence discussed and made recormnendations concerning the 

following.matters: 

a, Replacement of the eJd.sting Combined and NNI'O High Grade off-line 

general crypt~system; 

bp On-line toletypewrit~r c;ypher machtnes; 

c~ Spurious orniss~ons which endanger communications security; 

d, Sp.aech security equipments; 

e~ Facsimile security equipments (CIF.nX); 

f 

·f. Transmission security; 

g. Non-communications transmissions;· 

h, Weather cryptosystems; 

i, Communicati~ns '3ecurity Devulopment Programme; 

j. Exchange of equipments end components; 

k. Effects of advances in electronics; 

1. Co.-ordin.ation of Cryptographic and ComfiLunica.tions Equipm1.mt 

Development; 

m, 

'EGP GBGREi'!' 

Operating and Maintenance; 

Standards of 3ecuri ty. Requiremen.ts; . 

Future ·Liaison. 

.. 

Copy P of .Sf copies 
REF'ID:A523021 

• 

4. Under date of 9 February 1954, the British Joint Services ~J.ssion 

notified the .secretary, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.K. Chi0fs of· 

Staff approval of the subject report. 

fil..§.g_U.SSION 

5. Paragraph 5,a. of the report ref<:lrs to 11 the u.s, cryptoprinciple 

embodied in the J~Fsi-iM. 7", Inasmuch as AFS.AM 4 7B embodies the sema principle 

as this aFSbM 7, the conference recommsndation should be cha.ng~d to reflect 

this fact. At the same time it should be noted that while the J.FSiJ1 7 is 

in production, the ~FSAM 47B will not be in full production mitil later 

this year, the report should be clarified on this point. 

6. In paragraph 5.e. of the re·port it is stated that 11 the "C.b.N-UK-US 

JCECs have already agreeq that rnultirchannel sub-carrier frequency modulation is the best mc;thod of transmission for ClFk;X-----11 • While the 

conferees had been informed prior to the c~nf erence that such an agreement 

had been reached, this information was in error, and no combined agreement 

on the subject of a transmission system for enciphered fa.csin~le exists. 

Therefore, the conference recommendation on this subjoct should be del~ted. 

7. The conference In3.kes certain recomm,=mdations in paragra.ph 5.f. of 

the report oonc.3rning transmission security. In order to isoV·.te this 

problem from that of censorship of civil communicctions, the report should 

be modified to show that military corrnnunic~tions only ere involved, The 

phrase 11 insE.cure means" should also be more clearly defined. 

8. In paragraph 5.g. of the report recommendations are made concerning 

security of Mark X IFF. Since "SIF with IFF Mark X" is neither cryptographic 

nor co.mmunication securi t:r equipment it was not an .?.ppropriete subject for 

discussion at.the conference. The entire conference recommendation on this 

subject should therefore be disapproved and deleted. 

CQNCLUTM 

9. It is concluded: 

a. b.t the conference report should be modified to reflect the 

fact that the same cryptoprinciplo is contcined both in 1-;.FSJ.M 7 and 

AFSLM 47B, but thc."'.t the latter will not be in production until a lc:.ter d.:i.te. 

-~~-:.-· -··.··· 
REF ID:A523021 

'WP SE01Ci.!l'f • 

b. That the conference r~commendetion concerning e sub-carrier 

frequency modulation transmission s~rstem for combined use with enciphered fl'l.csimile ( CIFi:.X) should be deleted. 

c. That the conference recornr.udnd.ation. concerning transmission 

security should be modified to indicete clearly that militar;:r cornmuniC£".tions only a.re involved, and also more cleRrly to define insecure 

transmission means. 

d. That the conference recommendation concerning use of SIF with 

IFF Mark X should be disapproved and deleted from the report. 

RECOMJ:•iENDh. TIONS 

10,. It is recommended: 

a. That the foregoing conclusions be approved, 

b. That the conference report be approved except for the matters 

cov$red in the foregoing conclusions. 

c. That a memorandum. substantially as in enclosure "1411 hereto b0 

forwe.rded to the representative of the British Chiefs of Staff. 

d. Thc-.t a memorandum subst("ntially as in enclosure 11B11 hereto be 

forwarded to the Director, NP.tioncl. Security l..gency. 

TQP S"fi'CHli:T 
REF ID:A523021 

ENCLOSURE 11A11 

--~·...,._,_ 

MEMOHA.1\llUM FOH. 'IliE Ri.!:Pm~SENTA'l'IV.i!":S OF 

-· THE BRITISHClITEFSOFSTAFF 

1. The United States Joint Chiefs of Staff approve, with the minor 

exceptions noted below, the report of the UK/US Communications Security 

Conference 1953. 

· 2, It is recommended that the report be changed as follows: 

a. Paragraph 5.a., in first sentence of the text the term 11AFSAM 7" 

should read 11AFS1U1i 7 and AFSAM 47B11 , and the words "the former" should 

be inserted before the phrase "now in production in the u.s.A. 11 In 

the last sentence the term 11A:Ii,SAM 7" should read 11AFSAM 7 and AFSAM 47B". 

These changes are recommended inasmuch as the same cr7ptoprincipl.e is 

embodied in both AFSJ\M 7 and .AFS£1.M 4 7B. 

b. Paragraph 5.e,, delete all after the first sentence of the text 

inasmuch as the CAN-UK-US JCECs have not yet reached agreement on a 

transmission system for enciphered·facsimile. It is regretted that the 

conferees were provided incorrect information on this point. 

c. Paragraph 5. f n first sentence, insert the word "mi li tary11 be.-

tween the words "unclassified" and "message.sit, in order . cl.0arly to 

isolate the pt'oblom from the problem of civil communications, which is 

essentially a matter of censorship. Also, in the same sentence, insert 

parenthetically tho phrase "(radio and sensitiv\3 wir(;} circuits)" between the words 11 insecuro 11 and "means"• This change will more clearly 

express the intent of the wording, 

3. Tho u.s. view is that the IFF Mark l system with Selective Identification Fdature is neither cryptogre.phic nor communic~.tions security 

en,uipment and that it was not an appropriate subject for discussion at 

this confe,·ence. The U.S. Joint Chiefs of .Staff therefore disapprove the 

recommendations of paragraph 5.g. and recomm~nd the deletion of all but 

the ~irst three sentences, 

4. The United states J.,int Chiefs of Staff wish to uxpress their 

satisfaction with the result of the 1~53 conference, dspeoially the 

Enclosure 11A11 
'i'OP s::s~T 

REF ID: A523021 e 

agreements reached on the μroblem of replacing the existing combin~d and 

NA'l'O High Gre.de off-line cryptosystern, Eve.ry possible actlon is being 

ta.ken to implement the replacement of this g~h~ral cryptosystGIIL. 

5, For the next conference, to be held in Washington, thu Unitod 

States Joint Chiefs of Staff suggest that the opening date be ns agr~ed 

between the Dir8ctor, National Security Agency, and the Chairman, Cypher 

Policy Board. 

'XOP SiC:!tiT Enclosure 11.l!. 11 
REF ID:A523021 

ENCLOSURE 11B11 . 

----

MEMORANDUM FOR THE JIID;CTOR, 

NATION.:..'. .. -S::!:CURITY LG;Jl\TC~ 

1. The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff h&ve considered the report of the 

UK/US Communications Security Conference 1953. A copy of a memorandum 

t~ the Representatives of the British Chief's of Staff on this subject is 

attached hereto as enclosure 111-1.11. 

'f'OP 8EGH~'I' Enclosure 11B11