[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: White House crypto proposal -- too little, too late
[But how does one undo the dangerous criminals without violating the
privacy rights of everyone else? --Declan]
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Shea <[email protected]>
To: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: White House crypto proposal -- too little, too late
If you become a dangerous criminal, Declan, I think law
enforcement does have the right to use key escrow to undo you. That has
nothing to do with spying. You need to be a little more selective about
your language, and to make distinctions a little more rationally than you
do.
Best,
Joe Shea
Editor-in-Chief
The American Reporter
[email protected]
http://www.newshare.com:9999
On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> BTW, Joe, I'm still waiting for your response to my comments on why
> your endorsement of key escrow (GAK) is braindead. Or do you still
> think that the Feds should have the right to spy on my conversations,
> just like you thought that "porn isn't speech?"
>
> -Declan
>
>
> On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Joe Shea wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 09:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Joe Shea <[email protected]>
> > To: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: White House crypto proposal -- too little, too late
> >
> >
> >
> > Declan, how does your list work? Do you only publish comments
> > that agree with you? I didn't see my first two, and this one only came
> > with your response. Is this your version of freedom of the press, or what?
> >
> > Joe Shea
> > Editor-in-Chief
> > The American Reporter
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.newshare.com:9999
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
> > > From: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: White House crypto proposal -- too little, too late
> > >
> > > [Joe, this may be yet another area where we disagree. It represents a
> > > power grab by law enforcement; the infrastructure is prone to failure
> > > and can be compromised; it's more government meddling and coercion and
> > > more restrictions on free speech; the Fed bureaucrats controlling this
> > > are vulnerable to special-interest lobbying; the Constitution gives
> > > the Federal government no right to impose such restrictions; the FBI
> > > has demonstrated that we can't trust the Feds with our most personal
> > > information; it violates an absolute right to privacy; and it's
> > > technically impractical for a good number of applications. --Declan]
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
> > > From: Joe Shea <[email protected]>
> > > To: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: fight-censorship
> > > Subject: Re: FC: White House crypto proposal -- too little, too late
> > >
> > >
> > > Declan's most recent piece makes much more sense than the earlier
> > > one. He is quite correct in emphasizing the future vulnerability of the
> > > encryption logarithms rather than centering on whether or not terrorists
> > > might use them. By making them impossible to crack without the key, and
> > > permitting the key to be available to appropriate law enforcement
> > > authorities when absolutely necessary, everyone's real needs are
> > > satisfied, I think. I enjoyed this report a lot.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Joe Shea
> > > Editor-in-Chief
> > > The American Reporter
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://www.newshare.com:9999
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>