From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 23:29:18 +0800
To: Marc Rotenberg <3umoelle@informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf Möller )
Subject: Europrivacy
In-Reply-To: <m0wYgFx-0003b9C@ulf.mali.sub.org>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970604104626.035ebb28@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 09:13 AM 6/3/97 -0500, Marc Rotenberg wrote:
>http://wwww.wired.com/wired/4.05/idees.fortes/eurocrats.html
>
>Eurocrats Do Good Privacy
>
>Marc Rotenberg
>
>       It shows that governments, at least some
>governments, can be a force for progress in the crypto
>       world.

We're talking here about governments where unlicensed crypto is a crime.  Or 
other countries where anonymity is illegal.  Give me a break.

>       Reread that sentence. It is not conventional wisdom in the United
>States. Cyberlibertarians have been unrelenting in
>       their opposition to any federal role in crypto policy. Free
>marketers argue simply that there is no place for government
>       in the development of high-tech products. Cyberanarchists seem to
>doubt whether there is any role at all for
>       government.

And EPIC (nee CPSR) and CD&T are run by Left pro-government types who like
big 
governments and high taxes.  So we're even.

>       But the recent European experience should give pause to these allies
>in the battle for online privacy. Not only are
>       European officials at the highest levels prepared to embrace
>technologies of privacy, they have almost uniformly
>       opposed US-inspired surveillance schemes such as Clipper.

So are they going to give up their street cameras, address registration (in 
Belgium, you can't get the gas service turned on in your flat if you haven't 
registered with the commune -- but you can get electricity), occupational 
licensure (of *all* occupations as in Germany), national ID cards, Financial 
Police (Italy), computer registration, piles of mandatory paperwork, etc.?

>       Two recent reports are indicative. In "Privacy-Enhancing
>Technologies: The Path to Anonymity," the Netherlands and
>       the Canadian province of Ontario call for an exploration of new
>technologies to promote privacy. 

They could just repeal their privacy invading laws and regs.  No new 
technology needed.

>       It doesn't have to be this way. The reality of modern society is
>that government officials make decisions every day
>       about the rights of citizens. 

And with modern technology, we turn right around and make decisions on the
rights of governments.

>       not. Compared with governments that lack privacy officials,
>governments that have privacy officials have repeatedly
>       weighed in favor of privacy interests.

Then why do Europeans have *much* less privacy than Americans.  Tiny
example.  
In much of Europe, if mail coming to your flat is not addressed to the name
on 
the mailbox, it doesn't get delivered.  In the U.S., the P.O. still tends to 
deliver as addressed and let the occupants sort it out.  Somewhat looser.

DCF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 5.0 beta
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM5V/wIVO4r4sgSPhAQFxPgQAxujIQM+Mmph/l+byrW1AppuOi4t8AedG
QjDblzmmk7uJT8n7UqK9wV8H8mT0ANHWesrYWKyzADbwHxwa6LuCUzfLnWSTYvZn
EhAIHV00z9zOSP8xlH2Sj9eEQ+JReX3QKLhN87FxyCmJY5S+9o0/TqJUmshKgh8m
LDbeHpBBe9Y=
=KHsl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----