From: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 11:11:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: Unicorn an NSA agent?  WAS: New PGP "Everything the FBI ever dre
In-Reply-To: <v03110705b05bfc2bc63c@[139.167.130.248]>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19971005200455.00715690@netcom10.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 10:41 PM 10/5/97 -0500, jf_avon@citenet.net wrote:
>Unicorn wrote:
>
>>  borderline activity.  It's hardly a settled point.  That you are so quick
>>  to advocate corporate ownership of potentially private e-mail out of hand
>>  and without argument tells us much about your real position, Mr.
>>  Moscaritolo.  Three words:  "Expectation of Privacy."

I missed the original post, but here are my $0.02. I encrypt all outgoing
encrypted work email to my own key as well. I would be just as happy to
encrypt it to the corporate key. If I was to send some private email from
work, something that is not frowned upon at my place of employment, I would
simply pre-encrypt it with just the key of the recipient.

Meanwhile, I can understand the desire of a company to be able to read old
outgoing email even after the employee quit or forgot their passphrase.
After all, it might contain valuable information about details surrounding
past negotiations with clients. Information that I would not want to be
without.

And PGP's Policy Enforcer has another side to it: have you ever forgotten
to encrypt email that should have been encrypted? I have. With the Policy
Enforcer installed, that can't happen. Which may well save big hassles in
the future.

All IMHO, of course.

--Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
  PGP encrypted mail preferred.
  DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56.
  http://rc5.distributed.net/