From: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
To: “LYLE, DAVID R.” <lyled@pentagon-emh9.army.mil>
Message Hash: 2db40e774f6951250197ce1c5e360dc04d16c3ecdcf4383d545c05ac25290908
Message ID: <9402281337.AA04279@vail.tivoli.com>
Reply To: <2D6E94BC@Pentagon-EMH9.army.mil>
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-28 13:38:06 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 05:38:06 PST
From: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 05:38:06 PST
To: "LYLE, DAVID R." <lyled@pentagon-emh9.army.mil>
Subject: RE: Clipper Death Threat
In-Reply-To: <2D6E94BC@Pentagon-EMH9.army.mil>
Message-ID: <9402281337.AA04279@vail.tivoli.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
"LYLE, DAVID R." writes:
> Don't get me wrong. I am all for private communications. I'm very
> much against restricting the public's access to encryption
> technology. What gets me is when everyone runs around saying "this
> is a right".
Well, I'd say that the right to use whatever means available to shield
communication from eavedropping is as natural as any other. It's not
a "right" to be free from attempts to eavesdrop, however.
If the FBI tries to tap my phone, then laws may (or may not) be
violated but no natural rights have. If, however, I am prosecuted for
attempting to encase my information in a cryptographic strongbox
without providing the FBI the key, then I indeed see that as a
transgression against my natural rights as a person.
--
| GOOD TIME FOR MOVIE - GOING ||| Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com> |
| TAKE TWA TO CAIRO. ||| Tivoli Systems, Austin, TX: |
| (actual fortune cookie) ||| "Like A Little Bit of Semi-Heaven" |
Return to February 1994
Return to “tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)”