NODE cb3dfbd5Re: Anti-Clipper Article in "THe Computer Applications Journal"
smb@research.att.comTue, 19 Jul 94 04:13:34 PDT
Might I suggest that this is not the right newsgroup for anti-Clipper
articles? I've never seen *any* Cypherpunk defend it; what's the
point? Preaching to the choir? Repeat doses of brainwashing?
Citations are fine; they show what the outside world thinks. Technical
aspects are fine; there's a lot to be learned about Skipjack and key
escrow. But there's little point -- on this list -- to hearing yet
again that Clipper is bad (unless, of course, someone starts defending
it here).
--Steve Bellovin
NODE dc0bb45dRe: Anti-Clipper Article in "THe Computer Applications Journal"
Arsen Ray Arachelian <rarachel@prism.poly.edu>Fri, 22 Jul 94 22:21:32 PDT
On Tue, 19 Jul 1994 smb@research.att.com wrote:
> Might I suggest that this is not the right newsgroup for anti-Clipper
> articles? I've never seen *any* Cypherpunk defend it; what's the
> point? Preaching to the choir? Repeat doses of brainwashing?
Not at all. Keep in mind that newbies join this list often enough to
warrant such information being readily available to them. Also, not
everyone is elequent in their attacks against CLIPPER, ITAR, DT2, etc.
Such articles provide well needed analogies and situation examples for
common use. No cypherpunk should be without such resources. Just because
you find it superflous doesn't mean others won't find it interesting
and/or useful. I personally didn't find any >NEW< information, but that
doesn't make for a needless post.