1996-06-18 - Re: Britain to control crypto - official (fwd from Usenet)

Header Data

From: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
To: David Lesher <wb8foz@nrk.com>
Message Hash: c6012bc22bd2737a6747c8bfabce5d89ebe01842485e161774a043c3a305e97d
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960617193805.12894B@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Reply To: <199606112007.QAA01167@nrk.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-18 09:02:44 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:02:44 +0800

Raw message

From: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:02:44 +0800
To: David Lesher <wb8foz@nrk.com>
Subject: Re: Britain to control crypto - official (fwd from Usenet)
In-Reply-To: <199606112007.QAA01167@nrk.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960617193805.12894B@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Some more thoughts...

1) What activities will require TTP licencing? Will all certification
agencies be required to be licenced? What about if I sign a friends
key? Or if I hold a key signing party and offer to sign the key of
anyone showing a valid drivers licence or other picture ID?

2) Will all certification agencies be required to require disclosure
of private keying material before issuing a certificate?

3) Will laws be made requiring all commercial transactions using
public key certificates to be performed using certificates issued by
a TTP in order for such transactions to be valid?

4) Will LEAs be permitted to impersonate a non-consenting third party
for the purposes of allowing a conversation to be intercepted?
(blatant violation of the 4th ammendme... oh shit- never mind).

Simon.
---
Cause maybe  (maybe)		      | In my mind I'm going to Carolina
you're gonna be the one that saves me | - back in Chapel Hill May 16th.
And after all			      | Email address remains unchanged
You're my firewall -    	      | ........First in Usenet.........





Thread