From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 94 17:33:12 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Data havens
Message-ID: <199409080032.UAA22826@pipe1.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Responding to msg by tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) on Wed, 
7 Sep  4:14 PM

>And such normative laws ("they shouldn't keep such 
>records and hence  we'll outlaw them") won't work in an 
>era of strong crypto and privacy.  In fact, some of us 
>support data havens precisely to have records of,  say, 
>terminal diseases so we'll not lend money to 
>Joe-who-has-AIDS. It  may not be "fair" to Joe, but 
>it's my money.


It is worth noting that private "data havens" of all sorts 
abound, especially for financial matters, and most are not 
subject to governmental regulation.

Some banks have research departments that are older and more 
comprehensive than credit reporting agencies.  Favored 
customers can use them for evaluation of private deals.  

Large law firms maintain data banks that approach those of 
banks, and they grow with each case, through additions of 
private investigators paid for by successive clients.

Security professionals, like Wackenhut and Kroll, also market 
the fruits of substantial data collections.

To these add those of insurance, bonding, investment, financial 
firms and the like which help make or break business deals.

It's probable that massive government-regulated consumer data 
banks contain far less useful information than that of the 
private market where serious money is made with the best, 
privileged information.

Some may be porous but most are guarded better than Ft. Knox, 
with special protection against Uncle Sam's snoopers, indeed 
more secure than consumer records because more valuable.

Any c'punkers in the security side of the financial industry 
want to comment?  Anonymously of course.

John