From: Edgar Swank <edgar@Garg.Campbell.CA.US>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 20:31:30 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Zimmerman/Viacrypt
Message-ID: <1L3JPD7w165w@Garg.Campbell.CA.US>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Steve Reid recently posted (and sent me an Email copy - thanks Steve),

    > Phil disagrees with ViaCrypts new "business" version of PGP which
    > apparently encrypts all messages with an employer-supplied public key
    > in addition to any specified by the employee.

    Looking at Denning's critique (pro-escrow rant) of the NCR crypto
    report, she mentioned that mutant version:

    [http://www.cosc.georgetown.edu/~denning/crypto/NRC.txt]
      "Other corporations are similarly adopting products with data recovery
      capabilities as they integrate encryption into their systems (even PGP
      comes with data recovery in Viacrypt's Business Edition)."

    IMHO Phil Zimmerman has good reason to object to the mutant
    version, if it's going to cause the PGP name to somehow endorse
    escrow.

Denning is being disengenuous (so what's new). There's a big
difference between voluntary, not-government-sponsored "escrow" like
the type in the "business version" of ViaCrypt, and what Denning and
her friends in the government TLA's want.

Seems to me an employer has a perfect right to monitor his employee's
work product, for which he's being paid a salary and using the
employer's equipment (like business PGP).  If the employee doesn't
like it, he's free to seek employment elsewhere (or start his own
business).  Or he's free to encrypt all his personal Email at home
with a personal copy of ViaCrypt or a copy of free PGP.

-- 
edgar@Garg.Campbell.CA.US (Edgar Swank)
The Land of Garg BBS -- +1 408 378-5108