cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1993-10-04 - Re: PGP in FIDO

Header Data

From: Al Billings <mimir@u.washington.edu>
To: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Message Hash: f1bafcde8ecfa06000dc4d87bb50dd015d629428b079467ec9fb693af26458ba
Message ID: <Pine.3.05z.9310032042.A4683-a100000@carson.u.washington.edu>
Reply To: <199310032349.AA06425@eff.org>
UTC Datetime: 1993-10-04 03:29:02 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 3 Oct 93 20:29:02 PDT

Raw message

From: Al Billings <mimir@u.washington.edu>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 93 20:29:02 PDT
To: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Subject: Re: PGP in FIDO
In-Reply-To: <199310032349.AA06425@eff.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.05z.9310032042.A4683-a100000@carson.u.washington.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Sun, 3 Oct 1993, Mike Godwin wrote:

> But, Al, the issue is less whether a particular sysop is going to be
> prosecuted under ECPA than it is whether that sysop's conduct is *both*
> legal and ethical.
> 
> Even if a sysop's policies fit within ECPA exceptions, it's dishonest to
> justify such policies in terms of risks that don't exist. There is no
> documented risk that a sysop will be at greater legal liability if he or
> she allows encrypted mail.

True and if I had netmail set up for my system, I would probably allow
encrypted netmail. I already offer the latest version of PGP (source and
executable) to my users. The sysop ultimately has the right to choose if
he or she allows encrypted mail on his or her system. After all, the sysop
owns the machine and pays the bills, especially since most Fidonet sites
are hobby sites with no fees for access.

Wassail,
Al Billings

Thread