6 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
I hear concern over privacy and also over erasure of White House tapes. I pose the following question: Should an institution have the right to private communication? Is the White House an institution? Notice that I say "should" not "does". Which sort of world would you rather live in. I have mixed feelings. If we say that all computer communications should be accessible to courts then the effect will be to displace some communications from computers.
Norm Hardy raises an important issue: > I hear concern over privacy and also over erasure of White House tapes. > I pose the following question: Should an institution have the right > to private communication? Is the White House an institution? > Notice that I say "should" not "does". > Which sort of world would you rather live in. I have mixed feelings. > If we say that all computer communications should be accessible to courts > then the effect will be to displace some communications from computers. Individuals, corporations, clubs, and perhaps even government agencies should have the right to secure and private communications. The only caveat with the "perhaps" for the government is that it, in theory, belongs to "us." I find it unsettling when people of one political party are screaming for access to the private diaries and papers of members of the other party. Citing Ollie North's crimes is no excuse. If e-mail records are automatically seized and subject to archiving and dissection, then e-mail just won't be used. Historians are already becoming apoplectic at the vanishing of written records, letters, notes, and the like...this may reduce even electronic records. Strong crypto means even Ollie North can fully protect his records. (Of course, he presumably already had access to reasonably strong crypto, had he chosen to use it. And his e-mail was uncovered through the very common method of finding the archived copies of IBM's "PROFS" e-mail system kept by sysadmins. Sort of like the archives being kept by some of the so-called anonymous remailers!) -Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | PGP Public Key: by arrangement.
Tim May writes: > crypto, had he chosen to use it. And his e-mail was uncovered through > the very common method of finding the archived copies of IBM's "PROFS" > e-mail system kept by sysadmins. Sort of like the archives being kept > by some of the so-called anonymous remailers!) Hmmmm.... I find the accusation about anonymous remailers pretty strong. If you have proof of stuff like that happening, or even reasonable cause for suspicions, I feel the accusations and names of the sites should be published as widely as possible. That is the only way we can stop such unethical behavior. Julf (an0@anon.penet.fi) Johan Helsingius Kuusikallionkuja 3 B 25 02210 Espoo Finland Yourp net: julf@penet.fi bellophone: int. +358 0400 2605 fax: int. +358 013900166
Johan Helsingius writes: > Tim May writes: > > > crypto, had he chosen to use it. And his e-mail was uncovered through > > the very common method of finding the archived copies of IBM's "PROFS" > > e-mail system kept by sysadmins. Sort of like the archives being kept > > by some of the so-called anonymous remailers!) > > Hmmmm.... I find the accusation about anonymous remailers pretty strong. > If you have proof of stuff like that happening, or even reasonable cause > for suspicions, I feel the accusations and names of the sites should be > published as widely as possible. That is the only way we can stop > such unethical behavior. > > Julf (an0@anon.penet.fi) This was well-debated about a month or so back. Some remailers are archiving mail for debugging, others for legal protection (in case threats, blackmail, etc., used), and others are simply automatically archiving by site policies. In a note I wrote back then, which did not name the particular site involved, I reported that after sending a piece of "anonymous" mail, I got a letter of "support" for my position from the remailer operator! After I mentioned this to the Cypherpunks list, it came out that other sites were also keeping various forms of archives (for some or all of the reasons listed above). Anyway, such human-operated remailers, running on UNIX boxes in unsecure conditions, have many nonideal characteristics. -Tim -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | PGP Public Key: by arrangement.
Tim May writes: > This was well-debated about a month or so back. Ooops. Sorry. Must have been just before I joined the list. Always putting my foot in the wrong place... > In a note I wrote back then, which did not name the particular site > involved, I reported that after sending a piece of "anonymous" mail, I > got a letter of "support" for my position from the remailer operator! Urgh! > After I mentioned this to the Cypherpunks list, it came out that other > sites were also keeping various forms of archives (for some or all of > the reasons listed above). Double urgh! > Anyway, such human-operated remailers, running on UNIX boxes in > unsecure conditions, have many nonideal characteristics. Agree. Julf
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:38:45 +0200 From: Johan Helsingius <uunet!penet.FI!julf> > by some of the so-called anonymous remailers!) Hmmmm.... I find the accusation about anonymous remailers pretty strong. If you have proof of stuff like that happening, or even reasonable cause for suspicions, I feel the accusations and names of the sites should be published as widely as possible. That is the only way we can stop such unethical behavior. The service of anonymous remailing is separate from the the guaranteed anonymity of a remailers that don't keep logs. You'll note that the remailing aspects can be observed externally, whereas guaranteeing that logs are not being kept is extremely hard. One remailer operator I know keeps logs because you have to assume that everyone keeps logs, and try to be secure anyway. You can be sure that the NSA remailers will keep logs :-) The right thing to do is run a remailer of your own, and send everything encrypted through remailers, etc. dean