1996-01-20 - re: CAPI signing

Header Data

From: “James A. Donald” <jamesd@echeque.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 7bd006403ecedd3aef128e7f50c09494f4ef00a3d22aa352944926b1781dc16f
Message ID: <199601201647.IAA22500@mailx.best.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-01-20 17:02:52 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 01:02:52 +0800

Raw message

From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 01:02:52 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: re: CAPI signing
Message-ID: <199601201647.IAA22500@mailx.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 01:40 PM 1/18/96 -0600, Mike McNally wrote:
>
> A Microsoft person just responded via direct e-mail that they'll do
> CAPI signing in the United States (the word "only" wasn't in there,
> but that certainly was the implication).  

In order to get government approval of CAPI, Microsoft made concessions
that we will doubtless find offensive.  But once CAPI is in place and
working, then those concessions can be taken back.

CAPI is a good thing:  It is sound design and it will open another 
front in the conflict.  Once software is around that has crypto hooks in it, 
we can then deal with restrictions on CAPI modules using technical 
and political means.  I expect that technical means will be effective 
and successful.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
We have the right to defend ourselves	|   http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind	|  
of animals that we are. True law	|   James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the	|  
arbitrary power of the state.		|   jamesd@echeque.com






Thread