On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 00:16, JoeHill wrote: > On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 21:04:57 -0700 > aron Smith disseminated the following: > > > No ...Power is the guiding word > > I know, I know, I'm just yankin' the ol' neocon chain ;-) > > > guess we'lll just have to start encrypting our mail > > That's the problem: > > "What this means is that IP protocols may have to be adjusted, and the future of > encryption may also be in doubt." > > If I'm reading this correctly, adding this extra bit of overhead to TCP/IP will > enable both legitimate authorities (due process and all that), *and* > the not-so-legitimate the ability to get past things like encryption.
No, if the mail is encrypted before it is sent, then the tcp/ip stack is transmitting encrypted data. Interception modality is then irrelevant. I believe the real goal here is not to intercept data necessarily, but rather to be able to more efficiently target sources. If they are having trouble finding spammers, then they are certainly having trouble with more pertinent things. That still is no reason to put such a system in place. Especially if the law is being bastardized in order to do it. The whole thing stinks. LX
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
