From: Stanton McCandlish <mech@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 94 11:24:36 PST
To: paul@hawksbill.sprintmrn.com (Paul Ferguson)
Subject: Re: CLIPPER COMPROMIZED?
In-Reply-To: <9403181714.AA06850@hawksbill.sprintmrn.com>
Message-ID: <199403181924.OAA15439@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Just got word from the RISKS folks that the upcoming issue has a
denouncement of the Network World article, from Denning.  She says she
checked up on it, and it's BS.  This is pretty much obvious, but it still
leaves open the question of who originally came up with this rumor to
monger, and why?  It looks almost like an act of desperation.  That's my
interest in this.  If it was something that could be taken seriously, it
would be a good bit of propaganda work, truth or falsehood aside. But the
entire short article smacks of conspiracy theorist ranting.  I hope this
sort of stuff isn't going to become more frequent, or it may make
anti-Clipper people look, from the outside, like kooks.

-- 
Stanton McCandlish * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist
"In a Time/CNN poll of 1,000 Americans conducted last week by Yankelovich
Partners, two-thirds said it was more important to protect the privacy of
phone calls than to preserve the ability of police to conduct wiretaps.
When informed about the Clipper Chip, 80% said they opposed it."
- Philip Elmer-Dewitt, "Who Should Keep the Keys", TIME, Mar. 14 1994