[45517] in Cypherpunks
Re: Is ths legal?.. (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay Holovacs)
Sun Dec 17 10:48:34 1995
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 10:25:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Jay Holovacs <holovacs@styx.ios.com>
To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951217101355.22454C-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
On Sun, 17 Dec 1995, Black Unicorn wrote:
>
> I disagree. Instead it implies that interception and administrative
> review of content will be tolerated where it is "a necessary incident to
> the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or
> property of the provider of that service." Note that it will be the
> provider who makes the definition in the ex ante application.
>
The provider is allowed access ONLY for QC purposes. Getting back to thhe
original point, the provider's ability to interpret the contents of the
message is in no way required to monitor the system and cannot be used as
a justification in itself for prohibiting use of crypto.
Also, what if someone outside the system emails encrypted messages to the
user. What authority would the sys admin have there??
Jay Holovacs <holovacs@ios.com>
PGP Key fingerprint = AC 29 C8 7A E4 2D 07 27 AE CA 99 4A F6 59 87 90
(KEY id 1024/80E4AA05) email for key
