From: rishab@dxm.org (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh)
To: attila@hun.org
Message Hash: 95d633c9cfd36bc7cd3aed49c8fa2d3d1152d98a467bdd75173af8be3a83876f
Message ID: <199710131653.JAA11142@shell5.ba.best.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-13 16:58:35 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:58:35 +0800
From: rishab@dxm.org (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:58:35 +0800
To: attila@hun.org
Subject: free market (was RE: GET OFF THE DIME: PGP 5.5)
Message-ID: <199710131653.JAA11142@shell5.ba.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Attila wrote:
would you rather have PGP, Inc. with its preeminent
stature in the defense of freedom, freeware, and
privacy as well as an established, TRUSTED product
defining THE system which meets the need of the
[etc]
if i remember right, the idea behind PGP when it first
came out was that you ought not trust ANYBODY.
that's why you have the source code@!
it's a free market. if PGP Inc wants to make money,
and needs to meet the corporate demand for some sort of
alternative-key mechanism to snoop on their employees
(or keep backups of important correspondence when
employees forget their keys) so be it. as an individual,
it hardly matters to me if it's PGP or Microsoft that's
selling this stuff - remember, crypto software doesn't
read your mail, people do, and if my company wants to
be able to read my mail it'll buy the tools from anyone
who's selling. frankly i couldn't be bothered if the tools
are from "TRUSTED" PGP or Evil Bill. for all i know,
my employer is quite happy with GAK too.
of course if i'm willing and able to work independently
of any company, then i _do_ have control over the privacy
software i use, and in that case, if i'm paranoid enough,
i can always go through the source code.
-rishab
Return to October 1997
Return to “rishab@dxm.org (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh)”
1997-10-13 (Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:58:35 +0800) - free market (was RE: GET OFF THE DIME: PGP 5.5) - rishab@dxm.org (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh)