From: paul@hawksbill.sprintmrn.com (Paul Ferguson)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 94 19:43:54 PST
To: rishab@dxm.ernet.in
Subject: Re: your mail
In-Reply-To: <gate.HBsZic1w165w@dxm.ernet.in>
Message-ID: <9403120345.AA22974@hawksbill.sprintmrn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



rishab@dxm.ernet,in writes -

> The police can listen in anyway... In fact, so can anyone. And it's much easier
> for the police to listen in now, than it will be after Clipper. 
> 
> Joe 6-pack may not really worry about Clipper. In fact, Joe 6-pack may even be
> persuaded by Dr. Denning that Clipper will only be bad for criminals.
> 
> As much of the public does not necessarily share our objection to Clipper, 
> which is a matter of *principle*, really. The only people who might be 
> adversely affected by Clipper *in practice* are those who are lulled into a 
> sense of false security that Clipperphones are secure, when they're not.
> Joe 6-pack is not even likely to *buy* a Clipperphone, he's quite happy talking
> to Jill over plaintext lines, and hasn't yet raised a furour over the LE right
> to (after 'due procedure') listen in to the *plaintext* lines.

I'm fairly "lipped-sealed" when it comes to most chit-chat, keeping my
big mouth shut. I ususally chime in when least expeected, and when most 
insidious.

You, on the other end of the spectrum, seem to have a desire to open 
your mouth without a deep understanding of the encryption dilemma.

That's okay.

Cypherpunks objectives totally "fix" your subjective scenario(s).

Dig around a bit...

_______________________________________________________________________________
Paul Ferguson                         
Internet Engineering                               tel: 703.904.2437 
Herndon, Virginia  USA                        internet: paul@hawk.sprintmrn.com