1993-11-08 - Re: Private and Public

Header Data

From: Arthur Chandler <arthurc@crl.com>
To: nick@mit.edu
Message Hash: a6cba28291dd6e97d94b35f9c1031621d126fa02632459ac401d38ed14c2ed2e
Message ID: <Pine.3.87.9311081157.A17620-0100000@crl.crl.com>
Reply To: <199311081917.AA15324@crl.crl.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-08 20:13:03 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 12:13:03 PST

Raw message

From: Arthur Chandler <arthurc@crl.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 12:13:03 PST
To: nick@mit.edu
Subject: Re: Private and Public
In-Reply-To: <199311081917.AA15324@crl.crl.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9311081157.A17620-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

     Hmmm... my post may well ignite some flames; but I can't go along with
the notion that this list is for purely tech discussion. Encryption is a
social and political issue as well as a technical one, isn't it?  I would
think that it's more dangerous to ignore the social and political
ramifications than to have them out publically.
    It seems to me that encryption poses LOTS of dilemmas for any 
government. I chose just one -- taxes -- for my post. And looks like 
there are quite a few viewpoints on that one, with regards to the 
government's right to examine your income sources. The fact the encryption 
schemes are classified as military  (or military-type) material and so 
are subject to comparable controls by  the State Department should alert 
us to this fact. So to insist that we  stick to Greatest Primes and 
Modulo seems... unrealistic.
    Of course, if the discussion seems pointless or irrelevant to you... 
there's always the delete key.
    My :9&53xS+ (= digital $.02) worth.

On Mon, 8 Nov 1993, Nick Papadakis wrote:

> >   What do you think?
> 	I think you are inviting a political flame war on what is
> supposed to be a technical list.  Please take it to alt.privacy.
> 	- nick