From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:31:41 -0800 (PST)
To: hallam@ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Newt's phone calls
In-Reply-To: <199701212026.MAA11273@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199701212223.RAA26149@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote:
| >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not
| >think about it *at all*.  If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't
| >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue
| >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind.  But our communications
| >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers.  Brouhahas like
| >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda.
| 
| Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the
| crypto issue, zip, nada. That points to EFF and CDT not
| being on the ball on the crypto issue.

Was on the NYT op-ed page on Monday.  Something about scanners had a
few closing paragraphs about the ITARs with a comment from (David
Sobel)?

Adam



-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume