1996-03-16 - Re: Why escrow? (was Re: How would Leahy bill affect crypto

Header Data

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
To: WlkngOwl@UNiX.asb.com>
Message Hash: 59a2efde0741fe75d8666ded9ce0e005c835dd4c8e939d7c4fb6886e3f9357f2
Message ID: <m0tx8c5-0008yLC@pacifier.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-16 11:37:47 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 19:37:47 +0800

Raw message

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 19:37:47 +0800
To: WlkngOwl@UNiX.asb.com>
Subject: Re: Why escrow? (was Re: How would Leahy bill affect crypto
Message-ID: <m0tx8c5-0008yLC@pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 11:41 PM 3/13/96 -0800, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
>At 03:27 PM 3/13/96 -0800, jim bell wrote:
>
>> There is nothing in Leahy's bill which appears to prohibit the 
>> escrow agent from informing the key holder of a request/demand for the key; 
>
>On the contrary:  See section 2802(c)(4)

Ooops! You're right, it's much worse than I thought...

This bill is truly a pile of crap.






Thread