1997-10-08 - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5?

Header Data

From: Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>
To: Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
Message Hash: d5e2ad4c4dfd11b2c70868a4a5a0a05f03aff862e12b984149e54c066a1e833c
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.971007233333.28520D-100000@panix.com>
Reply To: <3.0.3.32.19971007142710.00a22970@mail.pgp.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-08 03:42:36 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:42:36 +0800

Raw message

From: Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:42:36 +0800
To: Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
Subject: Re: What's really in PGP 5.5?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971007142710.00a22970@mail.pgp.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.971007233333.28520D-100000@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Tue, 7 Oct 1997, Jon Callas wrote:

> Like it or not, government has a mandate to protect the people from
> dangerous technologies, be they in foods, drugs, autos, or information
> technologies.

Please tell me where it says this in the U.S. Constitution.

In particular, please tell me where the FEDERAL government is assigned 
this power.

Thank you.

--Charles Platt

Thread

• Return to October 1997

• Return to “Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>”
• Return to “Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>”
• Return to “Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>”
• Return to “Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>”
• Return to ““John W. Noerenberg” <jwn2@qualcomm.com>”
• Return to “Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>”
• Return to “lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)”
• Return to “Mike <Michael.Johnson@mejl.com>”
• Return to “Paul Pomes <ppomes@Qualcomm.com>”
• Return to “The Prosecutor <tp@dev.null>”
• Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”

• Return to ““William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@invweb.net>”

• 1997-10-07 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 05:44:17 +0800) - What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
  • 1997-10-08 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:42:36 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>
  • 1997-10-08 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 13:07:14 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
    • 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 01:22:09 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
      • 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 02:40:01 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@invweb.net>
        • 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 06:55:48 +0800) - access to storage keys, NOT comms keys! (Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5?) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
  • 1997-10-08 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 20:56:39 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Mike <Michael.Johnson@mejl.com>
  • 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 01:22:18 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
    • 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:58:04 +0800) - Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
      • 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:19:39 +0800) - Re: Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Paul Pomes <ppomes@Qualcomm.com>
    • 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 01:56:46 +0800) - Re: Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - The Prosecutor <tp@dev.null>
  • 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 07:27:31 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
  • 1997-10-09 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:45:06 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
  • 1997-10-09 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 02:39:33 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
  • 1997-10-10 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:57:35 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - “John W. Noerenberg” <jwn2@qualcomm.com>
    • 1997-10-10 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:24:06 +0800) - do NOT escrow communications keys (Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5?) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
    • 1997-10-13 (Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:06:53 +0800) - Re: Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
  • 1997-10-10 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 19:11:54 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)