[118044] in Cypherpunks
Re: Ah. That's more like it...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Reese)
Sat Sep 18 02:01:02 1999
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990917194353.03c223a0@flex.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 19:43:53 -1000
To: phelix@vallnet.com, cypherpunks@algebra.com
From: Reese <reeza@flex.com>
In-Reply-To: <37e1cbff.884041@news>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: Reese <reeza@flex.com>
At 05:05 AM 17-09-99 GMT, phelix@vallnet.com wrote:
>On 16 Sep 1999 19:53:10 -0500, John Young <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
>
>>Both DoD's Hamre and Janet Reno said at the press conference
>>that the new policy is not a relaxation of encryption controls,
>>no way.
>>
>>As the adminstriation team described it on CNN, the policy
>>is not a relaxation, but a repeat of last year's dissimulation.
>>The proof: Hamre said Representative Goss agrees with
>>the policy.
>
>Yep. I agree completely.
>
>Could somebody tell me just what the hell is different in this new
>"relaxation" of regs?
If prosecutors use decrypted evidence against you in a court of law, they
are not required to reveal how they decrypted it.
There went the hearsay/heresy rule,,,
R.
