1995-09-13 - Re: GAK

Header Data

From: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
To: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu>
Message Hash: e280af9ebf91e3c27df51e4b25282b9b1cd148ac8f60023600abaf511e579f7e
Message ID: <Pine.D-G.3.91.950912235711.4405F-100000@dg.thepoint.net>
Reply To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950912202830.20805B-100000@cavern>
UTC Datetime: 1995-09-13 03:53:33 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 12 Sep 95 20:53:33 PDT

Raw message

From: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 95 20:53:33 PDT
To: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu>
Subject: Re: GAK
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950912202830.20805B-100000@cavern>
Message-ID: <Pine.D-G.3.91.950912235711.4405F-100000@dg.thepoint.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, Mac Norton wrote:

> What's technology got to do with it, in principle?  If
> I write a letter in code, do I have to send the FBI the
> key, just in case?
...
The distinction, I think, is that for the past 40, 50, 60 ??? years, 
wiretapping has been available, recently only through court order 
(lawfully).  Encryption changes the status quo.

Change brings those who want to hasten it and those who want to stop it.  
The problem here, at least for me, is what *should* the policy be.  You 
(with one or two exceptions) have provided me with a lot of grist for the 
mill.  My thought process has changed dramatically on the issue, but is 
still fluid.

EBD





Thread