From: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu>
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 11:22:01 +0800
To: Alan Davidson <abd@cdt.org>
Subject: Re: SAFE Bill is a Good Thing--"Crypto For The Masses"
In-Reply-To: <v03020900af8e47bb1440@[207.226.3.11]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.970501220326.16231O-100000@cavern.uark.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Thu, 1 May 1997, Alan Davidson wrote:
> 
> What SAFE does legalize is strong, non-escrow encryption in the products
> that are most widely used, in almost all countries worldwide.  Once
> *ordinary people* have strong crypto built in to the products they use
> every day, it will be much harder for governments to take it away or
> restrict it.

What's illegal about strong non-escrow encryption now?  Why 
does it need to be "legalized"?  And wh will it be harder to 
require escrow "once *ordinary people* have strong crypto"?
Doesn't seem to follow necessarily, does it?
> 
> 2. CDT Does Not Support The Criminal Provision in SAFE

I don't get it.  CDT loudly supports the bill. The bill
contains the criminal provision.  I don't get it.  Do you?
MacN