nanog mailing list archives
Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible
From: Henry Linneweh <hrlinneweh () sbcglobal net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 22:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
Maybe Phil Zimmerman should come forth with new toys for big boys that will be more valient an effort than pgp with less a threat to his personal liberty. We definately need some relief from constantly being criminalized enmasse for actions from citizens of other nations and from control freaks who have for years slandered us and criminalized us for actions we have not participated in. -Henry --- "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () research att com> wrote:
In message <s0e2b1f2.059 () fstest05 fb>, "John Neiberger" writes:http://wired.com/news/print/0,1294,64043,00.html Yet another reason why we should develop a systemwhere all Internetcommunications can be easily encrypted, whetherit's email, VoIP, orwhatever. It's not like it's horribly difficult nowin some cases, butit does have its difficulties when it comes toimplementation on a largescale.Yes -- especially if people rely on wiretap-enabled certificates from their ISPs.... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
Current thread:
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible Henry Linneweh (Jun 30)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible James Edwards (Jun 30)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible William Allen Simpson (Jul 01)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible Eric Brunner-Williams (Jul 01)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible Evaldo Gardenali (Jul 01)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible james edwards (Jul 01)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible William Allen Simpson (Jul 01)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible James Edwards (Jun 30)
- Re: E-Mail Snooping Ruled Permissible Niels Bakker (Jul 01)