Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!husc6!harvard!seismo!hao!hplabs!hpda!hpisoa2!hpitg!vortex!lauren@vortex
From: lauren@vortex
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Re: Reading other peoples' mail
Message-ID: <919@vortex>
Date: Fri, 25-Apr-86 22:36:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: vortex.919
Posted: Fri Apr 25 22:36:00 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 13-May-86 03:08:25 EDT
References: <1400@ecsvax>
Lines: 33

I could comment at length on this topic from a variety of angles,
but due to time constraints I'll just make a simple statement
to those people thinking about encryption as a "solution" to the
"problem" of mail privacy:

The legal ramifications of allowing encrypted messages (I don't
mean "fake" encryption like rot13--I mean the real thing) 
through your system are decidedly unclear.  If anyone tells
you that they understand all of the legal issues involved in 
handling such traffic they simply don't know what they are talking about.

Courts have been bouncing back and forth regarding whether or not
third parties have some responsibility for materials passing through
their facilities.  The issues of common-carrier responsibilities,
who is and who is not a common-carrier, etc. are also complex to 
say the least.  The argument that "the material was encrypted so he
didn't know he was being used for something illicit" has not proven
to be a convincing one to various courts.

Given the fluidity of this situation, and impending new laws which
may complicate the situation even further, it would seem best
to avoid, whenever possible, putting third parties in the position
of possible problems.  I recommend against passing encrypted materials
through intermediate sites unless you have the explicit (written!)
permission from those sites to do so. 

----

But of course, there's a far simpler solution.  If you have something
really private to say to someone else, either don't send it via e-mail
or set up a direct link to that person's site.

--Lauren--