> ... they can't really test how effective the system is ...
Effective at what? Preventing people from traveling?
The whole exercise ignores the question of whether the Executive Branch
has the power to make a list of citizens (or lawfully admitted non-citizens)
and refuse those people their con
> I was browsing some of my old mail when I came across this. What's the
> status of Gilmore's case?
The regulations I'm challenging purport to require air and train
travelers to show a "government issued ID". Every traveler has been
subjected to these "requirements", but it turns out that they
> It reminds me of an even better way for a word processor company to make
> money: just scramble all your documents, then demand ONE MILLION DOLLARS
> for the keys to decrypt them. The money must be sent to a numbered
> Swiss account, and the software checks with a server to find out when
> the
> I asked Eric Murray, who knows something about TCPA, what he thought
> of some of the more ridiculous claims in Ross Anderson's FAQ (like the
> SNRL), and he didn't respond. I believe it is because he is unwilling
> to publicly take a position in opposition to such a famous and respected
> figu
> Or is there something we should be doing to get RedHat, and Debian, and
> other US-based distributions to include it?
Absolutely. It's already pretty secure. We should just make it
trivial to install, automatic, transparent, self-configuring,
painless to administer, and free of serious bugs.
> FreeS/WAN occupies a position very rarely found in efficient markets,
> such as open source software. While the position is rarely encountered,
> it can nonetheless exist: I believe that FreeS/WAN is a natural
> monopoly.
> ...
> But for whatever reasons, FreeS/WAN has been holding such a natura
charged by John Asscroft with "aiding
terrorists by eroding our national unity and diminishing our
resolve".)
> IMHO: If Freeswan had never been created, an alternate, more mature
> implementation would already exist in the mainline Linux kernel.
Make my day.
John Gilmore
PS:
Just because it is public DOES mean it's declassified. There are
Supreme Court cases on this. If the government can recover all the
copies, then it can REclassify it. But if it can't, then the document
is not classified.
I ran into this situation when digging up some of William Friedman's
ea
> Much of the hysteria regarding the DMCA's supposed ability to quash free
> speech by cryptographic researchers is being whipped up by opponents
> to the DMCA who are misrepresenting the DMCA in a calculated fashion in
> order to promote opposition.
The anonymous poster's legal analysis was not
