HOW THE NEW E-COMMERCE BILL COULD SEND JACK STRAW TO JAIL
At the bottom of this email you will find the text of a letter
sent to Home Secretary Jack Straw MP by Malcolm Hutty, a
volunteer from the e-campaign group STAND.org.uk
It's no ordinary letter.
--- begin forwarded text
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 17:20:44 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IP: DoD selects vendors for public key infrastructure pilot
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Source: Department of Defense
http://www.defenselink.mil/news
Anonymous says, (btw, I really wonder what's the point of having a technical
discussion incognito... I hope this is not for a really good/bad reason such as
you are living in some dark country),
> Hmmm... sounds like you are saying that if you had an anonymous payment
> system you could u
--- begin forwarded text
Date: 23 Sep 99 13:19:32 EDT
From: ROBERT HARPER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ignition Point <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: IP: NYT William Safire essay on privacy
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: ROBERT HARPER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Status: U
http://www.nytimes.com/library/o
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Johnny Bravo) wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 01:43:55 GMT, Greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >So what if the Clinton Administration says that they will allow
> >128 bit encryption to be exported? It still requires government
> >licensing- that
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Johnny Bravo) wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 01:43:55 GMT, Greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >So what if the Clinton Administration says that they will allow
> >128 bit encryption to be exported? It still requires government
> >licensing- that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Anonymous says, (btw, I really wonder what's the point of having a technical
> discussion incognito... I hope this is not for a really good/bad reason such as
> you are living in some dark country),
Frankly, I'm somewhat surprised. There are several really obvious
re
At 01:36 PM 9/26/99 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>There are two reasons. First, as you say below, there is simply the reality of
>there being multiple systems. Second, and more essential, there are some
>important advantages e.g. in efficiency to non-anonymous payment mechanisms.
>BTW, non-anon
Amir Herzberg writes:
> (btw, I really wonder what's the point of having a technical discussion
> incognito... I hope this is not for a really good/bad reason such as
> you are living in some dark country)
Yes, regrettably many of us do live in a dark country. Public discussions
of cryptographic
