1994-02-25 - RE: Clipper Death Threat

Header Data

From: “LYLE, DAVID R.” <lyled@pentagon-emh9.army.mil>
To: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Message Hash: aa74db2c2fc814e8f9236039c38d73b7167b57c6fd8977e86526b4287695ef61
Message ID: <2D6E94BC@Pentagon-EMH9.army.mil>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-25 21:14:09 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 13:14:09 PST

Raw message

From: "LYLE, DAVID R." <lyled@pentagon-emh9.army.mil>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 13:14:09 PST
To: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Subject: RE: Clipper Death Threat
Message-ID: <2D6E94BC@Pentagon-EMH9.army.mil>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




 -->
 -->On Fri, 25 Feb 1994, LYLE, DAVID R. COMPEX wrote:
 -->
 -->>. . .
 -->>
 -->>  -->3.  Why we have a right to strong encryption.
 -->>
 -->> Actually, our constitution does not say we have the right to private
 -->> communication.  It would be nice, but it's not a right.
 -->>
 -->
 -->Try the 9th Amendment on for size:
 -->
 -->"The enumeration in the Costitution, of certain rights, shall not be
 -->construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
 -->
 -->Privacy was a long recognized right in Anglo-American juris prudence.  It 

 -->goes all the way back to the very English idea that "a man's home is his
 -->castle."
 -->

Sandy, please re-read what I said... "private communication".  If this were 
a right, then wiretapping AT ALL would be illegal, and it is not.

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".

                    lyled@pentagon-emh9.army.mil
 -->
 --> S a n d y
 -->
 -->
 -->
 -->





Thread