1992-10-29 - How far would this extend…

Header Data

From: mark@coombs.anu.edu.au (Mark)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: b26fe44322934d9d2a5be35c7c8e11c72bc30e4ed517b7ae913f33eb7fbccecc
Message ID: <9210290109.AA29045@coombs.anu.edu.au>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1992-10-29 01:09:15 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 18:09:15 PPE

Raw message

From: mark@coombs.anu.edu.au (Mark)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 18:09:15 PPE
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: How far would this extend...
Message-ID: <9210290109.AA29045@coombs.anu.edu.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


With regard to the FBI bill, the definition of electronic communication
provider is rather vague IMHO. It seems to cover a BBS, any unix site
(or equiv) etc.

(I deleted the article so I cant quote it)

Anyway if the above is true will this mean all machines that electronic
communication traverses have to have a 'backdoor' so the gov can sit in
their offices and run through the mail spool as root? :)

Or log into any BBS and do the same?

There hasnt been any talk of it as such, probably because they can do it
fairly easily anyhow, but it just seems like another loophole in their
(the FBI's) favour.

_Sometimes_ I'm glad Im an aussie.

Mark





Thread