[9] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: New crypto regs outlaw financing non-US development
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (f_estema@alcor.concordia.ca)
Sun Dec 29 21:17:00 1996
From: f_estema@alcor.concordia.ca
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 19:20:11 -0500 (EST)
To: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
cc: cryptography@c2.net
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19961228225731.006b3080@netcom13.netcom.com>
On Sat, 28 Dec 1996, Lucky Green wrote:
> The GAK provisions require that the keys are made available without
> knowledge of the user. This disqualifies some of the suggested key recovery
> schemes alerting the user to the fact that keys are being requested.
This is constitutional? Isn't this a gag rule? What if the messages
alerting the user contain rather pointed political content (ie our usual
anti-GAK variety)?
I understand that they can have gag rules for federal employees (Bush's
old federally-funded clinic abortion gag rule--and say what happened to
that?), but private companies?
