From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 93 13:43:40 PDT
To: mimir@u.washington.edu (Al Billings)
Subject: Re: FIDOnet encryption (or lack thereof)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.05z.9310011332.A15318-a100000@carson.u.washington.edu>
Message-ID: <199310012040.AA23053@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


 
Al Billings writes:

> On Thu, 30 Sep 1993, Mike Godwin wrote:
> > 
> > My question is this: how does he know that the mail is encrypted if he's
> > not examining the mail that passes through his system? If he *is*
> > examining the mail that passes through his system, it seems likely that he
> > is violating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
> 
>  Only if he has stated that he allows private mail. Most sysops have
> specifically worded policy statements for their systems that say that the
> sysop can read any and all messages on the system and may do so at any
> time.

That's all very nice, but it doesn't enable a FIDO sysop to intercept
messages from people who are not users of his or her particular system.
Those people did not waive their rights to privacy under the ECPA.

> Bulletin boards do not normally offer truely private mail because of
> some of the legal implications.

This is a common myth. First of all, there are many BBSs that do
offer truly private mail, or whose sysops, as a matter of policy, do not
read others' private mail. Secondly, there's no legal liability associated
with allowing e-mail privacy. Third, federal law (the ECPA) bars
sysops from examining mail except under some very precisely defined
circumstances.

I suggest that you inform sysops who tell you otherwise that they can
contact me at the Legal Services Department of EFF. You've got my e-mail
address already--my phone number is 202-347-5400.


--Mike