From: mark@unicorn.com
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 1b12c55c967b28285e141b95ea8485b34014d30b4b2bed36703f65312d58ba16
Message ID: <878730951.18011.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-11-05 12:01:02 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 20:01:02 +0800
From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 20:01:02 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: PGP and Compliance with SEC and Liability Rules
Message-ID: <878730951.18011.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Tim May quoted from macweek:
>"The Gartner Group's Wheatman pointed out that PGP Policy Management Agent
>allows corporatins for the first time to centralize control over
>encryption: "For encryption to be accepted, IT had to gain control. This
>isn't Big Brother; this is necessary to comply with liability laws and SEC
>regulations.""
However, this doesn't seem to work, unless I'm mistaken about CMR
enforcement and the SEC regulations. CMR will only allow the snoops
to read incoming email, not outgoing, and hence if Joe Blow at
Foo-Bah.com wants to send me some handy insider trading tips CMR will
not stop them. So this seems to be another justification for CMR
which just doesn't make sense.
Mark
Return to November 1997
Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”