1995-09-07 - Re: Cybersecurity

Header Data

From: hallam@w3.org
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: ae833164d82fb0fefe90ba55c54d07a5cd6eb49cf9120013bd29fdf3440be09f
Message ID: <9509071605.AA05479@zorch.w3.org>
Reply To: <199509071329.JAA06512@panix.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-09-07 16:10:00 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 7 Sep 95 09:10:00 PDT

Raw message

From: hallam@w3.org
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 95 09:10:00 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Cybersecurity
In-Reply-To: <199509071329.JAA06512@panix.com>
Message-ID: <9509071605.AA05479@zorch.w3.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>It was very much on the side of those seeking privacy, presenting
>the government (even in the UK they are looking at mandatory key escrow, but
>they haven't exactly told British subjects about it) as being underhand,
>sneaking around to find ways of removing the privacy of the individual. 

The UK government looks at many things. Just because the US govt wants to do 
something daft and the UK wants to watch does not mean the UK wants to emulate 
it.

The UK laabour party is opposed to key escrow "we do not accept the "clipper 
chip" argument". The Tories have less than half the level of popular support and 
are barely recognisable as a government.

	Phill




Thread