RE: Schneier comment on CMR

["Gaon, David" <gaond@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

     But you should not be using corporate assets for this
doctor-patient 
     communication.
     If you do, then the coorporation may argue they have a right to the

     data on/in their system, and therefore CDR
     
     If however, you use a GAK compliant e-mail system, then Gov may see

     your communication whether or not you like it or know it.
     
     David Gaon


______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: RE: Schneier comment on CMR
Author:  Mike Wynn [SMTP:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]  at DISAHUB
Date:    10/15/97 4:22 AM


But I thought that the question of CDR was to do with personal 
privacy, not weither I was criminal or not!
I may not wish my mail, which could, be of a private nature to 
me to be recoverable by any one but the recipient
     
i.e. an e-mail conversation with my doctor.
     
Mike.
     
----------
From:      Adam Back
Sent:      15 October 1997 03:06
To:      ietf-open-pgp@xxxxxxx
Subject:      Schneier comment on CMR
     
     
(Quoted with permission from email).
     
Bruce Schneier <schneier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: 
>
>      Corporate Data Recovery does not have to be resiliant to a
hostile
>      user.  If a criminal is stupid enough to use a system with
corporate 
>      data recovery to commit his crime, then he is stupid enough to do
>      half a dozen other things that will get him caught.  If he is
smart 
>      enough to turn off a consentual data recovery feature, then he is
>      also smart enough to use a different encryption system if the
data 
>      recovery feature cannot be turned off.
     
Adam
--
Now officially an EAR violation...
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/
     
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo
"16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> 
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc
`