[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)

To: [email protected] (Just-in-time terraforming 30-Sep-1993 1008)
Subject: Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
From: Mike Godwin <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1993 11:07:09 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Just-in-time terraforming 30-Sep-1993 1008" at Sep 30, 93 07:08:46 am

Bill writes:

> Heh.  OK.  Well, if one behaves "ethically", then I guess *that* closes
> the issue.  It's his machine and he gets to make the rules.  (this is
> my personally-adhered-to point of view)

My question is this: how does he know that the mail is encrypted if he's
not examining the mail that passes through his system? If he *is*
examining the mail that passes through his system, it seems likely that he
is violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

--Mike

Follow-Ups:
- Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
  - From: J. Michael Diehl <[email protected]>
- Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
  - From: [email protected] (J. Eric Townsend)

References:
- FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
  - From: Just-in-time terraforming 30-Sep-1993 1008 <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Availability of ACM papers on Net ?
Next by Date: Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
Prev by thread: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
Next by thread: Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread