1997-10-24 - Re: PGP Employee on MKR

Header Data

From: mark@unicorn.com
To: whgiii@invweb.net
Message Hash: d4402fbf78fe52200185443b1006a3fa18063eceee56a5dcac1fef9f293b7cee
Message ID: <877714803.13910.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-24 18:28:01 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:28:01 +0800

Raw message

From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:28:01 +0800
To: whgiii@invweb.net
Subject: Re: PGP Employee on MKR
Message-ID: <877714803.13910.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



whgiii@invweb.net wrote:

> There is a simple solution to that don't work for one if you don't like
> their policies.

I agree; that's why I don't. But I see an inconsistency here. PGP keep
telling us that CMR isn't so bad because you can work around it, or
superencrypt, or otherwise avoid the company's right to snoop on all
communications. Yet you, who believe in this right, support CMR, which
can be used to defeat that right, over simple escrow of employee's 
corporate communication keys. Why?

Again, I'm not saying that the companies have no such right. Personally
I'd rather escrow my corporate key than see widespread CMR in its current
form.

    Mark






Thread