From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Message Hash: 6baf064742a86c038c8da25bdf6e0a5ab4c587b751799fa5830d5c9bd977c6c6
Message ID: <v03102800b06159b61d82@[207.167.93.63]>
Reply To: <36e200bba528c46e3694521079832b77@anon.efga.org>
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-08 16:13:02 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 00:13:02 +0800
From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 00:13:02 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: What's really in PGP 5.5?
In-Reply-To: <36e200bba528c46e3694521079832b77@anon.efga.org>
Message-ID: <v03102800b06159b61d82@[207.167.93.63]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 6:04 AM -0700 10/8/97, Ryan Anderson wrote:
>Well, any company giving stock advice (and governed by SEC rules on stock
>tips, etc.) is already require to have all outgoing mail approved (e-mail and
>snail), so does it matter if they record it or not?
>
Could you give me some cites for this rule?
My own stock broker seems to be sending me stuff on the spur of the moment,
so unless he has a government agent sitting in his office approving these
notes he sends me, there is no "outgoing mail approved (e-mail and snail)"
situation.
Further, I dispense stock advice on occasion, and can, like all persons, be
charged with insider trading, violations of SEC rules, etc., under the
right circumstances. And yet my mail, e-mail or USPS, is _not_ subject to
"approval." Being subject to SEC rules does not mean prior approval, or
cc:ing of mail to the SEC, etc.
(They can try to get a warrant if they think I've violated the insider
trading or other securities laws. But no "approval" is needed, nor of
course is any escrow of keys required.)
I won't comment on the very long post Jon Callas so thoughtfully prepared
for us....it's too long for casual comment. My initial glance at it
suggests that it addresses problems most businesses don't perceive to have.
(When I was Intel, we didn't have crypto. But if we did, the real concern
would be encryption of lab notebooks, documents on disk, etc., not my
communications with outsiders. These are the files which would vanish were
I to be hit by a truck. As we have discussed many times, how does
escrowing the _channel_ key (Alice sending to Bob) solve the "hit by a
truck" problem?)
--Tim May
The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
Return to October 1997
Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”