home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.crypt:4680 alt.society.civil-liberty:6544
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.society.civil-liberty
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!dptg!ulysses!ulysses!smb
- From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
- Subject: Re: Limits on the Use of Cryptography?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov12.153227.4949@ulysses.att.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:32:27 GMT
- References: <1992Nov11.061210.9933@cactus.org> <1dre8mINNhfk@transfer.stratus.com> <1992Nov12.003306.17491@src.umd.edu>
- Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
- Lines: 17
-
- In article <1992Nov12.003306.17491@src.umd.edu>, tedwards@eng.umd.edu (Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:
- > "P.C." needs for crytography...
- >
- > * protection of communication between homosexuals who wish to
- > remain in the closet, especially those in the armed forces
-
- Well, come January 20 I think that that ``especially'' will change...
-
- Be that as it may, we have our own examples very close to home (or to
- $HOME). A number of newsgroups feature ``anonymous contact services'',
- with the attendant worries about the security of those services. Indeed,
- the code for one of them was just posted to a source newsgroup.
-
- PGP can do a lot better -- the contact service just becomes a key
- registry, and encrypted email can even be posted to some group like
- alt.personals.gerbils.pgp. Anonymous posting then becomes as simple
- as an open NNTP port.
-