From: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:48:02 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Email Confidentiality and Malpractice?
Message-ID: <v0300780aae2bd8ca6cc2@[206.119.69.46]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



--- begin forwarded text


X-Sender: oldbear@pop.tiac.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 12:48:12 -0300
To: Bob Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
From: The Old Bear <oldbear@arctos.com>
Subject: Email Confidentiality and Malpractice?

Bob:

I always feel funny passing along items like this from usenet.

This was posted to nine of the alt.business newsgroups dealing with
law and insurance investigation.  It seemed reasonably interesting,
contains some useful information, and is not overly offensive for a
self-promotional spam.  (And, at least it was posted in appropriate
places.)

If you see any merit in all or part of this being reposted to dcsb
or elsewhere, feel free to do so.

Cheers,
Will

--- Forwarded message follows ---
Newsgroups:alt.business.insurance
From: syr@netroplis.net (Bill Fason)
Subject: Email and confidentiality: Are you committing malpractice?
Organization: Serves You Right Civil Process & Investigations
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 96 17:57:54 GMT
Lines: 74

If you're discussing cases through email and you're not encrypting your
correspondence, then you could be committing malpractice.  See:

        http://www.gsu.edu/%7Elawppw/lawand.papers/bjones.html

                        Client Confidentiality:
            A Lawyer's Duties with Regard to Internet E-Mail
                                  by
                            Robert L. Jones

                            August 16, 1995

    Contents:
       1. E-Mail v. Snail Mail
       2. Hacker, Cracker, Phracker - Sniffer, Spoofer, Spy
       3. Encryption to the Rescue?
       4. Bad Things That Happen to Good Lawyers
       5. Ethical Considerations
       6. The Attorney-Client Privilege
       7. Negligence Anyone?
       8. Conclusion
       9. Endnotes

Bob's homepage is  http://www.mindspring.com/~bobjones/my1sthom.html


And here is the website for Georgia State Univ. Law School.  It has one
of the best collections of cyberlaw resources I've seen.  GSULaw is at
the cutting edge of the field.

            http://www.gsu.edu/~lawadmn/gsulaw.html

While Bob's brilliant article specifically addresses attorney-client
confidentiality, his insights apply to any professional using email.
In fact, anyone who uses email for internet or intranet communications
faces the same fact of life: unencrypted email carries no expectation
of privacy.  It's like dropping a postcard through the mail.  In fact,
it's even worse.  Important discussions of cases, clients, patients,
bids, negotiations, strategies or anything requiring confidentiality
needs to be securely encrypted.  Sending unencrypted sensitive email
invites nightmare scenarios.

        Viacrypt is the answer. It combines the essentially unbreakable
strength of Phil Zimmerman's PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) with the
user-friendly interface of Windows.  Easy to install and use, Viacrypt
allows the user to quickly encrypt and decrypt email.  It also allows
the user to sign messages, and to check the signature of other electronic
messages.
        Viacrypt also allows the user to encrypt files on one's own hard
drive.  A user of PGP can leave the office knowing that sensitive files
will remain confidential regardless of who is on the evening cleanup
crew.
        Regular PGP for DOS is free. If you want to find out more about
where and how to get your free copy, then visit the Encryption Policy
Resource Page:

                     http://www.crypto.com/

        And if you need help getting it up and running, feel free to
contact me.

        Viacrypt, on the other hand, costs money.  I offer it
        for $125 plus shipping.

        I suggest that you get your copy fast while it is still legally
available.  Both FBI Director Louis Freeh and Vice President Al Gore
have both spoken out against allowing US citizens to use encryption this
strong.  They want everyone to register their private encryption software
keys with the federal government, thus allowing the feds to read anyone's
email.  It is reminiscent of the old communist governments' laws
requiring citizens to register their typewriters with the police.
Widespread use of PGP will hamper government efforts to ban it.  PGP is
so strong that the federal government has declared it a weapon and
banned its export.

Bill Fason
Serves You Right
Civil Process & Investigations          * Skiptraces
1436 W. Gray #272                       * Background Checks
Houston TX 77019                        * Asset Searches
713/524-4767                            * PGP Encryption Consulting
713/942-8165 fax                        * Financial Fraud Detection
SLN A-8111

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/