On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Dvir Volk wrote: > > > One note: people there seem to be quite clueless regarding the > > distribution of encryption technologies: > > > > The legitlators accept the position of the Security Forces according to > > which "limiting the use of encryption and limiting the distribution of > > sophisticated security systems will help the defense organizations to > > intercept messages containing information that can lead to to the > > circumvention of terrorist acts. On the other hand, giving encryption > > technologies to terrorists will increase the number of casualties in > > crimes that can't be prevented. > > > > Anybody else senses here a cheap use of the terror (in greek: fear) > > threat? > > you only quoted half a paragraph.the first half sets a different > meaning and tone: > "we thought that all supervision on encryption should be cancelled, > since it's obvious that a terrorist who want to deal with encryption > won't ask for a license, where as legitimate companies encounter > bureaucratic difficulties".
Read it again. This was the beginning of the paragraph. This is what they initially thought. But they have accepted the opinion of the "security forces" (this term sounds horrible). -- Tzafrir Cohen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
