I find that unlikely. It seems rather draconian and a little 'conspiracy-like'
-----Original Message----- From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Allen Sent: Friday, 17 April 2009 5:56 PM To: profox@leafe.com Subject: RE: [NF] more secure or less threats? I can remember when Microsoft was making the encryption for NT there was talk that the US Government should have the decryption routines and that they had to be approved. I do wonder how they can control millions of PC's though. Maybe just suspect ones. Big brother was here anyway, we just didnt notice. Or maybe care. Al -----Original Message----- From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ricardo Aráoz Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 5:33 PM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Re: [NF] more secure or less threats? Allen wrote: > Maybe paranoid people should not go online then. > Al > > I happen to know a former MS partner (encryption area) who told me his source code had to be sent first to n s a which returned the compiled code to be included in W$. We can only guess what they did to the code. Maybe nothing, just compiled it, we all know there are only nice folks over there. What would your guess be? [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/004201c9bf3a$a9eb7a80$fdc26f...@com.au ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
