Re: not a flame please read and think about this

[an116512@anon.penet.fi]

to make my point: why is pat farrel helping the nsa and nist make
better key escrow?

i quote mr farrel:

	We reworded #5 to say "want to Trust the Product." This means that it 
	is untampered, works as expected, etc. We then hashed out ways to 
	know this. The list ended up looking like:
	1. is available only as object code
	2. contains some "hash" function to check for modifications
	3. contains some unique hash, with uniqueness based upon something 
		like "site," "per copy" or "per release" 
	4. Contains policies against modification, such as liscense language 
		against decompilation.
	5. OS-related security, such as runs "protected mode" instead of as a 
		wild DOS program.

and

	We then developed "goals" including:
	1. One version for sale worldwide
	2. Allow development in the US
	3. Domestic Law Enforcement Agencies want Escrowed (I almost wrote GAK :-)
	4. Must interoperate with everything
	5. Receiver can only decrypt if escrow agencies can decrypt.

hey why not just write the escorw code for them!!!???

is mr farrel just being naive or is does he realize who hes working for?

sorry to single him out but this is just an example of what im talking about.

he is not the only example by far.

think people!!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
If you reply to this message, your message WILL be *automatically* anonymized
and you are allocated an anon id. Read the help file to prevent this.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin@anon.penet.fi.