From: Nick <nicknoize@iname.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 620aa9e3b10dded486ffb6ca415c3e76c356262528b203b6e46faf038fd01402
Message ID: <340F81A6.68FE@iname.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-05 04:20:59 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:20:59 +0800
From: Nick <nicknoize@iname.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:20:59 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls
Message-ID: <340F81A6.68FE@iname.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
There was a story a few weeks ago about how the various
federal bueracracies are not keen on giving their keys to ANY sort of
"trusted third party" whether it is a psuedo private or overtly gov't
entity. They don't trust each other and are of course interested in
being able to keep their own dirty little secrets to themselves.
They seem to realize that the plan gives the administration and it's
FBI, Stalanesque powers over every other dept, as well as the
citezenry.
Then earlier this evening,an administration spokesman, issued a press
statement distancing the administration from Freeh's testimony
in an effort to deflect some of the resulting fallout.
> The on-line NYT's claim today that everyone except the
> administration is opposed to its crypto policy is daring
> hyperbole. What's your take on that?
>
> http://jya.com/crypto-tops.htm
>
>
Return to September 1997
Return to “Nick <nicknoize@iname.com>”
1997-09-05 (Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:20:59 +0800) - Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls - Nick <nicknoize@iname.com>