Well, if we go have beer I'm sure you're welcome. TimH > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:59 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [EUG-LUG:2749] Re: US Congress already discussing bans on > strong crypto] > > > uhh... when you guys go have that beer, can I come along? id > like to hear more (and maybe have a beer!) > Jamie > > >Yes. I ussually get attacked when I talk like this. Let me > buy you a > >beer. > > > >TimH > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > >> Jacob Meuser > >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:24 AM > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: [EUG-LUG:2746] Re: US Congress already discussing bans on > >> strong crypto] > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 10:20:41AM -0700, Tim Howe wrote: > >> > Wouldn't putting back doors into encryption schemes in the > >> US mean that > >> > we could only decrypt messages encrypted with our own crypts? It > >> > wouldn't help us decrypt anything done with encryption developed > >> > elseware. So basically they want to spy on Americans. > I feel safer > >> > already.... > >> > >> Duh! It's very typical of lawmakers. A tragedy happens, someone > >> who wants to be popular (as in get reelected) says some garbage > >> which he doesn't fully understand to feed off the ignorance and > >> confusion of those he's trying to be popular with. In the end, > >> the people that are (supposedly) being protected lose liberties > >> and are less safe. > >> > >> I'm an online merchant. I deal with "stolen identity" crimes > >> on a regular basis. It costs me money. Without strong crypto, > >> it will only get worse. I know I'm not alone. I'm sure many > >> of you work for companies that rely on crypto. The internet > >> is much more than a communications device; it is a signifigant > >> part of the economy. > >> > >> Breaking crypto is not going to make it that much easier to > >> find terrorists. The thing is, most crypto acutally can be > >> deciphered. Sure it takes a lot of computation cycles, and > >> one can't simply "tap the internet to see who's talking about > >> about blowing something up." > >> > >> It's just a weak excuse for the lack of effort in intellegence > >> gathering. I mean, IPs tell a lot more about someone than what > >> they might write in an email. After all, IPs can be traced to > >> actual physical locations, as in people, as in the people who > >> should be under surveilence for what they have done, not for > >> what they have written. > >> > >> If the government really wants to read someone's emails, then > >> they should spend more on developing computers that are efficient > >> enough to do the task, as well as actually identifying the emails > >> they think may contain valuable information; not take away the > >> freedom and privacy of all it's citizens. > >> > >> Of course, the real irony is that the US has sold crypto > >> technology to MidEast countries that you and I cannot have here, > >> which leads to a whole other discussion, mostly historical, and > >> revolves around the Opium Wars many years ago, but like I said, > >> that's a whole other discussion. (But I'll give a hint ... > >> "wars" against contraband are both *popular* and *profitable*. > >> Now, who do those words appeal to, lawmakers perhaps?) > >> > >> -- > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > > ------------------- > - >
