From: Apache <apache@bear.apana.org.au>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 4ca658ab9511096028c82ad1c04eea3888d5b691b31bff658bc5626de50b84d0
Message ID: <199708010535.PAA10817@bear.apana.org.au>
Reply To: <v03007803b0067a1a1c9e@[168.161.105.191]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-08-01 05:46:00 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 13:46:00 +0800
From: Apache <apache@bear.apana.org.au>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 13:46:00 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Denning backs away from GAK
In-Reply-To: <v03007803b0067a1a1c9e@[168.161.105.191]>
Message-ID: <199708010535.PAA10817@bear.apana.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Declan McCullagh said:
>BTW, Will R did a piece a month or so ago on Denning's shifting stance.
>Maybe I should call her up and press her for details.
While your at it why not ask if she (see her post to this list dated 1
Sep 1996; and several EFF board members referred to in John Gilmores post
to this list on 2 Sep 1996) are still having problems with anonymity.
I didn't think she was a GAKer way back then so who knows which way the
wind is blowing her now. Garfinkel refers to her long held belief that
controls on encryption were necessary so perhaps I am wrong and she was a
GAKer all along although her reference in her email of 1 Sep makes no
mention of it when she sought to distinguish her comments on anonymity
from the issue of encryption thus:
"Please note that this is not the same as the right to *private*
conversations and the use of encryption; this is the issue of being
accountable for what you publish in public."
Then again her comments appeared to be a slipery as an eel in terms of
meaning so who knows what the hell she means/meant/will mean at any
particular point in time.
--
.////. .// Charles Senescall apache@bear.apana.org.au
o:::::::::/// apache@quux.apana.org.au
>::::::::::\\\ Finger me for PGP PUBKEY Brisbane AUSTRALIA
'\\\\\' \\ Apache
Return to August 1997
Return to ““William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@amaranth.com>”