-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Aug 29, 2013, at 3:26 PM, zooko <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 09:18:33PM +0300, ianG wrote: >> >> I'm not convinced that the US feds can at this stage order the >> backdooring of software, carte blanche. Is there any evidence of >> that? >> >> (I suspect that all their powers in this area are from pressure and >> horse trading. E.g., the export of cryptomunitions needs a >> licence...) > > I don't know. I asked a lawyer a few days ago -- a person who is, as far as I > can tell, one of the leading experts in this field. Their answer was that > nobody knows. I've spoken to my own lawyers and gotten their opinions. My comments on things reflect my knowledge. > So I don't think the question of "To whom is my service provider vulnerable?" > is the right question. You can't really know the answer, so it doesn't help > you > much to wonder about it. The right question is "Am I vulnerable to my service > provider?". The answer, as far as Silent Circle's current products go, is > "Yes.". You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion, but I disagree. I say the answer is no -- or perhaps more fully, no more than yours is. > > (Kudos to Jon for saying something sensical in that last one!) > Thank you. Jon -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Universal 3.2.0 (Build 1672) Charset: us-ascii wj8DBQFSH9OGsTedWZOD3gYRAmpvAJ94g0k2MFpyYe/e0+3Y8l5G7yna9wCgvI4n Q8oVvYZSSVGqewclSiV4WJ8= =e1/k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
