home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!strnlght
- From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
- Subject: Re: sci.crypt.science
- Message-ID: <1992Dec25.200354.16194@netcom.com>
- Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
- References: <Bzru3E.1I4@chinet.chi.il.us> <1992Dec25.172117.23059@ghost.dsi.unimi.it>
- Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 20:03:54 GMT
- Lines: 67
-
-
- First, since this is my only way of communicating with the folks at
- ghost.dsi.unimi.it, let me say to David Vincenzetti that our mail
- router still refuses to pass mail to his site. Our sysop says he sent
- several messages to David but got no reply. David says he took local
- action to deal with those from his site who were cracking accounts at
- our site, but our sysop is still concerned, and can't seem to resolve
- things with David because he can't seem to get a communication going.
- So it looks like that site won't be accessible for mail or ftp-ing
- from here for the indefinite future, though the echo sites work fine.
- The person for David to contact, to try to get this resolved, is
- hoodr@netcom.com. He needs to do so in a way that will permit
- him to receive replies from hoodr, i.e. via some intermediate
- mail address not at ghost.
-
- Next to the point David makes about cryptography being in aid of
- privacy.
-
- Let's talk straight here (not that David isn't):
-
- This is an arena in which there are a number of parties at interest,
- each with legitimate interests, some of which impinge on the interests
- of other parties. Thus, presenting one set of interests as if it were
- the whole story is badly misleading, though if it were presented as
- the interests of a particular party, rather than "the truth", it might
- be perfectly legitimate.
-
- One's own encryption:
- Honest privacy lovers want unbreakable cryptography to protect their
- honest messages;
- Crooks want it to protect their criminal activities;
- People with something to fear, which may not be strictly illegal,
- such as cheating on one's wife, want it to protect those things;
- People who are afraid of crooks want to to protect, for example,
- legitimate financial transactions;
- Governments want it to protect military and intelligence secrets;
- Businesses want it to protect competitive information;
- etc.
-
- The encryptions of others:
- Governments are against it for crooks and spies, unless they can
- break the traffic;
- Governments are against it for others who may be crooks and spies,
- since eavesdropping is one way they find out about such people;
- Crooks would like to be able to monitor governments (police radios, etc.)
- Businesses would like to crack their competitors' secrets;
- etc. etc.
-
- Note the both lists are incomplete, and gloss over such details as
- laws regulating Government eavesdropping and laws regulating private
- cryptography. To put all the caveats in each line would make this
- message much longer, so no flames on either point--I recognize that
- there are process and regulatory limitations on government
- eavesdropping in many countries. I'm trying to make only one point in
- this message: Different parties have different legitimate interests in
- the matter, and many conflicting interests are legitimate to some
- parties, though not others.
-
- To argue a narrow single position in order to demonize another position
- is both unfair and inappropriate.
-
- David
-
- --
- David Sternlight
- RIPEM Public Key on server -- Consider it an envelope for your e-mail
-
-