cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-11-30 - Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow

Header Data

From: Adam Shostack <adam@lighthouse.homeport.org>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: a553c8b88d0f01de3ff4e3459efed1b5e7a18e620210b5c53228e8939e67da71
Message ID: <199511301533.KAA17468@homeport.org>
Reply To: <199511300807.DAA12251@opine.cs.umass.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-30 16:09:03 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 00:09:03 +0800

Raw message

From: Adam Shostack <adam@lighthouse.homeport.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 00:09:03 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow
In-Reply-To: <199511300807.DAA12251@opine.cs.umass.edu>
Message-ID: <199511301533.KAA17468@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


| > http://www.cnet.com/Central/News/govt.html
| 
|    To secure Net communications, the government will need to have access to
|  private data exchanges using what is known as a key escrow security system,
|  said Clark. He added that an invincible security system for the Net is 
|  possible, but such a system won't be built unless the government
| has a stake in it. "That's where key escrow comes in," said Clark. 

	(Assuming this means Netscape intends to build-in key escrow,
not lobby for it...)

	How does Netscape intend to address the liability issues if
the key database is stolen and their *voluntary* actions lead to my
private communications being exposed?

Adam

(Jeff, if you could pass this on to the powers that escrow, I'd
appriciate it.  I know you're here on behalf of you, but...)


-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume

Thread