1994-02-07 - Re: reno_key_escrow.statement (fwd)

Header Data

From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
To: kevin@axon.cs.byu.edu (Kevin Vanhorn)
Message Hash: 3a905d3af37c918c926e9f4fa56d6a23b69ffda5dfd3bba3b2875c64c366f88d
Message ID: <199402072319.SAA08343@eff.org>
Reply To: <9402072316.AA20220@axon.cs.byu.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-07 23:20:41 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 7 Feb 94 15:20:41 PST

Raw message

From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 94 15:20:41 PST
To: kevin@axon.cs.byu.edu (Kevin Vanhorn)
Subject: Re: reno_key_escrow.statement (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <9402072316.AA20220@axon.cs.byu.edu>
Message-ID: <199402072319.SAA08343@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Kevin writes:

> But the word "warrant" appears nowhere in there.  The agencies requesting
> the keys aren't required to present a warrant; they're only required to
> promise that they're lawfully authorized.

You're misunderstanding the language. Strictly speaking, law-enforcement
agents who seek wiretaps receive "authorization orders," not warrants.
So the word "authorized" is perfectly appropriate.