1997-09-26 - RE: Oxley Amendment

Header Data

From: Michael Brock <hrast@flash.net>
To: “‘Lucky Green’” <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
Message Hash: 8c2d7bb61cad6b0ed8aecc6c17890fee78106ca688fff6f215c16cd17654b5e7
Message ID: <01BCC9F4.D0AF8BE0@dasc2-106.flash.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-26 02:08:33 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 10:08:33 +0800

Raw message

From: Michael Brock <hrast@flash.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 10:08:33 +0800
To: "'Lucky Green'" <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
Subject: RE: Oxley Amendment
Message-ID: <01BCC9F4.D0AF8BE0@dasc2-106.flash.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

I agree that there should be *NO* rules about encryption...  If the government wants to break encryption, buy the people who hack it and let them go just like every other good industrial country...


-----Original Message-----
From:	Lucky Green [SMTP:shamrock@cypherpunks.to]
Sent:	Thursday, September 25, 1997 9:17 AM
To:	Michael Brock
Cc:	cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject:	Re: Oxley Amendment

On Wed, 24 Sep 1997, Michael Brock wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> I wonder if Mr. Solomon of NY will rethink his decision to not bring 
> up SAFE without Oxley to the entire House after the unprecedented 
> coaltion of companies and individual groups that came together to 
> make sure that mandatory key recovery stays a "1984" like dream.   I 
> find it incomprehensible that one man, would block the introduction 
> of this bill, after it being proved that this is what his 
> constituents want....

What in the world makes you believe that Mr. Solomon's constituents would
want SAFE to go the the floor? SAFE *must* be defeated, with or without
the Oxley ammendment.

-- Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to> PGP encrypted email preferred.
   "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?"