1996-02-21 - Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)

Header Data

From: tbyfield@panix.com (t byfield)
To: ipgsales@cyberstation.net
Message Hash: dfe9ad0e8ef99b7ac7c9ec19b0442f227b6068be4d6dc5e62ac34420b872f8ed
Message ID: <v02120d05ad5033345066@DialupEudora>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-21 08:16:45 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 16:16:45 +0800

Raw message

From: tbyfield@panix.com (t byfield)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 16:16:45 +0800
To: ipgsales@cyberstation.net
Subject: Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
Message-ID: <v02120d05ad5033345066@DialupEudora>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

At 6:46 PM 2/20/96, IPG Sales wrote:

>Hedging, hedging, hedging - why? I did not noitice this <...>

        IPG, why don't you sit down and draw up the terms of a challenge?

        * what information and/or materials IPG will release
        * to whom it will release them and when
        * who is or isn't elligible
        * what you will and won't accept as "breaking your system"
        * the arbitrating body
        * a starting time and a deadline
        * the award

        You'd do well to be _very_ thorough in these terms, since any
perception that IPG was trying to throw the game would draw that much more
fire. You'd also do well to make terms terms conform to real-world
circumstances: for example, if someone hacking the office machines on which
which you generate, store, and/or disseminate RNs is a practical threat to
your product, then admit that as an acceptable part of a "break."