Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hpda!hpisoa2!hpitg!amdahl!gam@amdahl
From: gam@amdahl
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Re: Reading other peoples' mail
Message-ID: <3093@amdahl>
Date: Tue, 29-Apr-86 12:47:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdahl.3093
Posted: Tue Apr 29 12:47:00 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 14-May-86 01:47:18 EDT
References: <1400@ecsvax>
Lines: 33

In article <919@vortex.UUCP> lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) writes:

> 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. 

Laws that inhibit the free flow of information in a securely encrypted
form are a threat to the Freedom of Speech and the implied freedom of
communication.

By all means, use encrypted mail whenever possible, as it is your only
guarentee of privacy in transit.

A judge who would claim that a courier holds responsability for what
the message says is nothing more than a naive re-statement of the old
stories about killing the bearer of bad news ....

> 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--

Here we both strongly agree.
-- 
Gordon A. Moffett		...!{ihnp4,seismo,hplabs}!amdahl!gam

Moderation in all things, including moderation.
--
[ This does not represent Amdahl Corporation ]