- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Market Failures, Monocultures, and Dead Kids (Oh My!)
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199703182356.XAA02032(a)mailhub.amaranth.com>, on 03/18/97 at 08:39 PM, Alec <camcc(a)abraxis.com> said: >Not in every case do the parents have the right to determine what >treatment shall be performed or whether it shall occur at all. More often >than not the courts have allowed medical treatment for the child who is >not able to consent to such treatment for himself. >In many instances courts have stepped in to authorize blood transfusions >for children of Jehovah's Witnesses, who follow Biblical injunctions not >to "eat" blood (Gen. 9:4). Recently the Church of Christ Scientist [?] has >been under societal and governmental attack for insisting on substituting >healers for medical teams even in cases of children afflicted by cancer >accompanied by apparently unbearable pain. >Parents most certainly are not the only ones to determine the welfare of >their children; society has assumed a significant role and typically moves >to protect the child from the parents or from the _beliefs_ of the >parents. Just because the government subverts the RIGHTS of the parents does not mean that the parents do not have those rights. A parent is the sole person who has a *RIGHT* to determine the welfair of their childern. You do not have that right, I do not have that right, the government does not have that right. To beleive that the government should "protect" a child from the beliefs of its parents is truly FASISTS/COMMUNIST/STATIST (pick you flavor they are all the same <G>). I as a parent have the sole right to determine what religon to teach my children, how to rase my children, how to teach my children, how to reward my children and how to punish my children PERIOD. Perhaps you should take your STATIST tendicies over to alt.hitler.fanclub as they are quite out of place here. "When the wants of society override the rights of the individule that society must die" -- whgiii - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: I'm an OS/2 developer...I don't NEED a life! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000 iQCVAwUBMy+K649Co1n+aLhhAQG7nAP/Y4hrT/SVyNr9xYOe/5pyERD00dMzOtNw W16+9Sx9ZAge7NCbpHP9nOvYOHJ5sZqjUzgJrrqoEWgE9Mm16dBKBbYZzs86/u3u rLxb2MK9pAzWgikFe45Gb9Rfv/mDyFQz/rx9iBSE46lJ/B/7w9AaFNdgGnXzDruf d/obdF244mc= =iPaz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

Re: Market Failures, Monocultures, and Dead Kids (Oh My!)
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In, on 03/18/97 at 10:07 PM, Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> said: >William H. Geiger III wrote: >> dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: >> >Suppose X chooses to innoculate their kids and Y chooses not to innoculate >> >their kids against, say, polio; and Y's kids get it. They're not going to >> >give it to someone whose parents chose to innoculate them. (This is a kind >> >of borderline example, not unlike circumcision. The individual affected >> >by the choice is too young to understand what it's all about, but doesn't >> >want to be stuck with a needle. Why are the parents more qualified to make >> >decisions for him than the state?) >> The issue of who is more qualified is irrelevent. >> The parents are the ONLY ones who have a right to determin the welfare of >> their childern. If the parents determin that the risks of reaction to the >> innoculation outways the benifits that choice is their's and their's alone. >I inherited three kids (9, 11, and 13) in November, and am starting to get >used to the schools' intrusions just now. So far, I've prepared one form >for the kids to hand to the teacher when there is an off-campus trip >scheduled. Like who's driving, are they certified by the school board, >chaperones (who are they), etc. >Recently they did a surprise dental inspection of the youngest kid. I'm >preparing a form to tell the schools that any certification they require >on the kids as to health, etc. will be provided by our doctors, not >theirs, so the kids can skip their inspections. So far I haven't met with >any serious opposition, but who knows? >(I'm informing them that I'm a Puritan, and follow very strict religious >practices) >Today's Long Beach paper had an extensive article on "pregnancy counciling >support groups" for sixth grade girls (in Santa Ana?), and the "support >groups" were mandatory. Religious fundamentalists are certain to hit the >ceiling on this one - not just the increase in sexual awareness aspect, >but the hoodoo-voodoo aspect of a "support" group that smacks of New Age >practices (their article, not mine). According to the article, the groups >have an amazing record, i.e., pregnancies down by 80% or more among the >teenage girls. Well the best way to aviod all this is to "Home School". In the end they will get a much better education and they woun't turn out to be lock-step robots for the STATE. This requires a two parent home though (politically incorrect these days) and a wife with a few brain cells. :) The next best thing is a private school but even they are being corrupted by all this touchy feely crap. Still better than sending them to the STATE'S reeducation centers. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: I don't do Windows, but OS/2 does. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000 iQCVAwUBMy+NIY9Co1n+aLhhAQEtcwP9ErQCp0JxgBjubj3nKqDWToTgnshaokwY FDazEqRECwxCxMcxpZqolQsfqrge73ZD20464eunY+fvMQQRtttWXco4s30FYyX5 of3HIlkJs9TmJNZeWq+234uPGlXNyOoLJNJNlZ+6yBo1GwDU+mABqCLn2JL/jEuM pei59wOFWoE= =utH9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Market Failures, Monocultures, and Dead Kids (Oh My!)
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

snow wrote: > So, parents should be allowed to: > 1) Beat their children on a daily basis, because it is good for them. > 2) Refuse to educate their children _at all_ because Knowlege is the > devils work. > 3) Not clothe their children at all beause God Will Provide. > 4) Teach their children how to perform Oral, Anal, and "straight" sex > because they need to learn it someday? Mom? Is that you, mom? Where did you go with that sailor? -- Toto "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/xenbody.html

1 0

WebWorld 1-2
by Bubba Rom Dos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

lambda 3.01 - Your Customs Officer is Watching You
by Jerome Thorel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

lambda 3.01 contents: --> CDA countdown : The Supreme Court Has Some Clues on Knocking Down the CDA --> New in Cyberspace: The Frontiers Are Back! Your Customs Officer Is Watching You --> Crypto Update : France and the OECD * * * * * THE SUPREME COURT HAS SOME CLUES ON KNOCKING DOWN THE CDA Well before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of the CDA, David Sobel, EPIC's legal counsel, reminded the electronic community that the Court handed down a decisive decision two years ago. Excerpts from the EPIC Alert 4.04 newsletter herewith: --- begin fwd message --- To avoid potential criminal liability under the CDA's "indecency" provision, information providers would, in effect, be required to verify the identities and ages of all recipients of material that might be deemed inappropriate for children. If upheld, the statutory regime would thus result in the creation of "registration records" for tens of thousands of Internet sites, containing detailed descriptions of information accessed by particular recipients. These records would be accessible to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors investigating alleged violations of the statute. Such a regime would constitute a gross violation of Americans' rights to access information privately and anonymously. Two years ago, the Supreme Court upheld the right to anonymous speech in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission. EPIC believes that the Court's rationale in that case applies with even greater force to the Internet "indecency" provisions now under review. The Court noted in McIntyre that: " The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. ... "Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation -- and their ideas from suppression -- at the hand of an intolerant society." Whether the millions of individuals visiting sites on the Internet are seeking information on teenage pregnancy, AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, classic works of literature or avant-garde poetry, they enjoy a Constitutional right to do so privately and anonymously. The Communications Decency Act seeks to destroy that right. If upheld, the CDA would render the Internet not only the most censored communications medium, but also the most heavily monitored. "EPIC is confident that upon review of the legislation and its impact upon free speech and privacy rights in emerging electronic media, the Supreme Court will affirm the lower court decision invalidating the CDA as fundamentally at odds with the Constitution." --- end fwd message --- The EPIC said that following the oral argument, the Reno v. ACLU plaintiffs and lawyers will hold a news conference to offer in-depth analysis and commentary (approximately 11:30 a.m. ET). The event will be cybercast live via RealAudio on the World Wide Web. Links to the cybercast will be available at: http://www.epic.org/cda/ and http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/trial/appeal.html * * * * * YOUR CUSTOMS OFFICER IS WATCHING YOU New in Cyberspace: The Frontiers Are Back! On March 6, the French security agency SCSSI gave its approval for a secured payment protocol called C-SET, or Chip-Secured Electronic Transaction. After one look at this European version of the US standard of SET, which will be completed this year, one might ask: "Why bother?" Your customs officer might well reply: "For me!" C-SET re-draws the boarders of the real world in cyberspace -- where national boundaries were scheduled to have been given up forever. Moreover, the system could easily be used to escrow private communications, because encrypted messages will be transmitted to a third party in order for police to have a lawful access to its secret key. The Intelligence Newsletter (http://www.indigo-net.com/intel.html) first reported in its Feb. 26 edition that C-SET could be used as a national shield for controlling money transfers, and thus be used as an intermediary between the law enforcement agencies, the vendor and the buyer. French security officials agreed to accept C-SET because it is compatible with future trusted third-party systems, dedicated to assuring national governments that all encrypted communications will be key-escrowed. "The French Finance Ministry has not yet decided to apply taxes and duties for online transactions, but C-SET is the adequate system to do that", says Claude Meggle, director of security at the French Groupement des Cartes Bancaires (a consortium of 200 French banks), the main architect of C-SET. "It is a way for national states to keep their sovereignty, without hindering international commerce". In France and other European countries, credit cards are so-called "smart cards." Embedded with microchips, it is a more secure way to authenticate -- and identify -- the buyer than a hand-written signature. The GCB was not fully satisfied by the SET standard, which "provides only software security as it doesn't include a smart card," the Intelligence Review reported. "As a result, the 'certificate' which enables a customer to be identified when making an electronic purchase is stored on his hard disk. This exposes it to all types of attack, and makes the system less than 'portable' -- the certificate is linked to the computer and not the person. The C-SET is exactly the opposite," the newsletter added. Hardware is needed to use C-SET; a PIN-number pad manufactured by state-owned Bull's smart card division CP8 will be sold for less than 500 FF (US$100), Meggle told lambda bulletin. When the users are connected to a virtual mall, they'll have to type their 4-digits secret code (as it is today with bank cards), and the transaction will be transferred to a distant server owned by the bank. Thus this go-between server will be based in the country where a user has his or her bank account, and the same bank plays the role of a TTP. The user's privacy and anonymity will be protected, but only from the merchant's point of view. Banks-turned-TTPs will have to keep records of all transactional data for law-enforcement purposes. Recently, officials at the main money laundering agencies of industrialised countries met to discuss the problems caused by the Internet. C-SET could be one way to keep money transfers under the close eye of the law. The European Commission agreed to the system being tested as a possible future standard, and all major European countries have plans to test it in the near future (from Germany to Belgium, UK, Spain, etc.) It is no surprise that the SCSSI, one of the most conservative cryptography agencies in the world -- which considers the US technology lead on encryption as a national threat -- first refused to allow C-SET to encrypt a part of the transaction. The TTP compatibility was seen as a necessary condition for approval. Meggli said the encrypted material uses a DES-based 56-bit key, while a RSA public-key system (1024-bit length) is used for transmission. As Meggle acknowledged, this PIN-pad based identification system could be also used as a way to identify users that send encrypted messages in private communications. The TTPs will have to keep a record of connections -- as all banks are doing today to officially fight fraud -- and give a user's private key to police authorities if called upon to do so. * * * * * CRYPTO UPDATES * French officials at the SCSSI and the prime minister's office are worried that aspects of the government's crypto policy may be regarded by the European Commission in Brussels as an obstacle to common market principles. The government's law outlining a TTP key-recovery system, voted by the legislature last summer, has yet to be enacted by ministerial decree. An initial version of the decree (see lambda 2.13) stated that only French employees (of companies held with a majority of French capital) would be allowed to act as a TTP in the country. Whether the law would violate rules concerning the free flow of capital and workers in the European Union is uncertain. However the French government has something in its favor (for better or for worse) regarding possible anti-competitive practices in this area: The EC is prohibited from making decisions that may overlap with issues of national security. * Meanwhile, the Paris-based OECD is to publish its guidelines on international cryptography procedures (lawful access, condition of TTP systems, etc.) at the end of March. The report has been approved by both the OECD expert group and division committee with slight changes in the wording, and now needs only the endorsement of the OECD Council of Ministers. ---- A report by Jerome Thorel <jt(a)freenix.fr> English rewriting: Ken N. Cukier <100736.3602(a)CompuServe.COM> lambda archives --> www.freenix.fr/netizen ---- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Jerome Thorel Planete Internet Journalist, Paris Editor / Redac chef thorel(a)netpress.fr 191 av A. Briand, 94230 Cachan Tel: 33 1 49085833 - fax-31 www.planete-internet.com

1 0

Enigma
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timmy `C' May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is cross-ruminated. __ /_/\__ \_\/\_\ Timmy `C' May /\_\/_/ \/_/

2 1

WebWorld 3-4
by Bubba Rom Dos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: Market Failures, Monocultures, and Dead Kids (Oh My!)
by camcc＠abraxis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 12:42 AM 3/19/97 -0600, you wrote: *|>Parents most certainly are not the only ones to determine the welfare of *|>their children; society has assumed a significant role and typically moves *|>to protect the child from the parents or from the _beliefs_ of the *|>parents. *|Just because the government subverts the RIGHTS of the parents does not *|mean that the parents do not have those rights. *| *|A parent is the sole person who has a *RIGHT* to determine the welfair of *|their childern. You do not have that right, I do not have that right, the *|government does not have that right. To beleive that the government should *|"protect" a child from the beliefs of its parents is truly *|FASISTS/COMMUNIST/STATIST (pick you flavor they are all the same <G>). *| *|I as a parent have the sole right to determine what religon to teach my *|children, how to rase my children, how to teach my children, how to reward *|my children and how to punish my children PERIOD. *| *|Perhaps you should take your STATIST tendicies over to alt.hitler.fanclub *|as they are quite out of place here. *| *|"When the wants of society override the rights of the individule that *|society must die" -- whgiii Dear whgiii, Children are, also, possessors of certain inalienable rights. Parents have certain _privileges_ in regard to their children which others do not have; if the parents abuse the _rights_ which their children possess solely by virtue of being humans and citizens, the state is obligated to intervene on behalf of the child--a citizen. In just the same way that if I were to threaten or batter you (or visa versa) the state would interpose itself to protect me. _With reservations_ I grant you parents have _great_ leeway in the areas of religious training, education, medical care, general child rearing (punishment/reward). When parents overstep either by action or neglect, society intervenes. I _understand_ your point that in an ideal society the government would not intervene. At this point, though, we don't seem to be there. Alec What's the point of the following? Discourse is healthy in an open system. Why the exclusion? *|Perhaps you should take your STATIST tendicies over to alt.hitler.fanclub *|as they are quite out of place here. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMy/w7SKJGkNBIH7lAQEwpwP/UlEJbHBt6ahryC7X8tKqWssFoluJhVDa IIUQVCq/NkJ3Qg3LY804JNDnfgYbVFea0LY5FUiybAEDHOc0AEBRUt0ZE2ccgrt4 sNSKPTQ27csTEljM9b6PRU4Isod6d9l10APsuUbXM/knsZeNDfbwTWsoYPl66/t1 jbQ56j0t+vE= =Ju3R -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

5 5

PGP seminar at New York University 3/27/97
by Subir Grewal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Computer Advocacy @ New York University and NYU's Academic Computing Facility (ACF) present a seminar on Pretty Good Privacy as a part of Computer Awareness Week on Thursday, March 27 at 12:00 pm (noon). Ilya Slavin of the Computer Advocacy and Tim O'Connor of the ACF will discuss the reasons for using encryption tools, give a brief background of the algorithms behind the face of PGP and analyze their strengths, and demonstrate ways to incorporate PGP into popular tools such as Pine and Tin. A key signing session will follow. If you are new to PGP or just want your key signed by a few more people and happen to be in New York City at the time, please come! All are invited. Refreshments will be served. For more information, see http://www.nyu.edu/pages/advocacy/awareness/

1 0

(Fwd) lambda 3.01 - Your Customs Officer is Watching You
by Charles Anthony 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 11:07:46 +0100 To: thorel(a)netpress.fr From: Jerome Thorel <jt(a)freenix.fr> Subject: lambda 3.01 - Your Customs Officer is Watching You lambda 3.01 contents: --> CDA countdown : The Supreme Court Has Some Clues on Knocking Down the CDA --> New in Cyberspace: The Frontiers Are Back! Your Customs Officer Is Watching You --> Crypto Update : France and the OECD * * * * * THE SUPREME COURT HAS SOME CLUES ON KNOCKING DOWN THE CDA Well before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of the CDA, David Sobel, EPIC's legal counsel, reminded the electronic community that the Court handed down a decisive decision two years ago. Excerpts from the EPIC Alert 4.04 newsletter herewith: --- begin fwd message --- To avoid potential criminal liability under the CDA's "indecency" provision, information providers would, in effect, be required to verify the identities and ages of all recipients of material that might be deemed inappropriate for children. If upheld, the statutory regime would thus result in the creation of "registration records" for tens of thousands of Internet sites, containing detailed descriptions of information accessed by particular recipients. These records would be accessible to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors investigating alleged violations of the statute. Such a regime would constitute a gross violation of Americans' rights to access information privately and anonymously. Two years ago, the Supreme Court upheld the right to anonymous speech in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission. EPIC believes that the Court's rationale in that case applies with even greater force to the Internet "indecency" provisions now under review. The Court noted in McIntyre that: " The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. ... "Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation -- and their ideas from suppression -- at the hand of an intolerant society." Whether the millions of individuals visiting sites on the Internet are seeking information on teenage pregnancy, AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, classic works of literature or avant-garde poetry, they enjoy a Constitutional right to do so privately and anonymously. The Communications Decency Act seeks to destroy that right. If upheld, the CDA would render the Internet not only the most censored communications medium, but also the most heavily monitored. "EPIC is confident that upon review of the legislation and its impact upon free speech and privacy rights in emerging electronic media, the Supreme Court will affirm the lower court decision invalidating the CDA as fundamentally at odds with the Constitution." --- end fwd message --- The EPIC said that following the oral argument, the Reno v. ACLU plaintiffs and lawyers will hold a news conference to offer in-depth analysis and commentary (approximately 11:30 a.m. ET). The event will be cybercast live via RealAudio on the World Wide Web. Links to the cybercast will be available at: http://www.epic.org/cda/ and http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/trial/appeal.html * * * * * YOUR CUSTOMS OFFICER IS WATCHING YOU New in Cyberspace: The Frontiers Are Back! On March 6, the French security agency SCSSI gave its approval for a secured payment protocol called C-SET, or Chip-Secured Electronic Transaction. After one look at this European version of the US standard of SET, which will be completed this year, one might ask: "Why bother?" Your customs officer might well reply: "For me!" C-SET re-draws the boarders of the real world in cyberspace -- where national boundaries were scheduled to have been given up forever. Moreover, the system could easily be used to escrow private communications, because encrypted messages will be transmitted to a third party in order for police to have a lawful access to its secret key. The Intelligence Newsletter (http://www.indigo-net.com/intel.html) first reported in its Feb. 26 edition that C-SET could be used as a national shield for controlling money transfers, and thus be used as an intermediary between the law enforcement agencies, the vendor and the buyer. French security officials agreed to accept C-SET because it is compatible with future trusted third-party systems, dedicated to assuring national governments that all encrypted communications will be key-escrowed. "The French Finance Ministry has not yet decided to apply taxes and duties for online transactions, but C-SET is the adequate system to do that", says Claude Meggle, director of security at the French Groupement des Cartes Bancaires (a consortium of 200 French banks), the main architect of C-SET. "It is a way for national states to keep their sovereignty, without hindering international commerce". In France and other European countries, credit cards are so-called "smart cards." Embedded with microchips, it is a more secure way to authenticate -- and identify -- the buyer than a hand-written signature. The GCB was not fully satisfied by the SET standard, which "provides only software security as it doesn't include a smart card," the Intelligence Review reported. "As a result, the 'certificate' which enables a customer to be identified when making an electronic purchase is stored on his hard disk. This exposes it to all types of attack, and makes the system less than 'portable' -- the certificate is linked to the computer and not the person. The C-SET is exactly the opposite," the newsletter added. Hardware is needed to use C-SET; a PIN-number pad manufactured by state-owned Bull's smart card division CP8 will be sold for less than 500 FF (US$100), Meggle told lambda bulletin. When the users are connected to a virtual mall, they'll have to type their 4-digits secret code (as it is today with bank cards), and the transaction will be transferred to a distant server owned by the bank. Thus this go-between server will be based in the country where a user has his or her bank account, and the same bank plays the role of a TTP. The user's privacy and anonymity will be protected, but only from the merchant's point of view. Banks-turned-TTPs will have to keep records of all transactional data for law-enforcement purposes. Recently, officials at the main money laundering agencies of industrialised countries met to discuss the problems caused by the Internet. C-SET could be one way to keep money transfers under the close eye of the law. The European Commission agreed to the system being tested as a possible future standard, and all major European countries have plans to test it in the near future (from Germany to Belgium, UK, Spain, etc.) It is no surprise that the SCSSI, one of the most conservative cryptography agencies in the world -- which considers the US technology lead on encryption as a national threat -- first refused to allow C-SET to encrypt a part of the transaction. The TTP compatibility was seen as a necessary condition for approval. Meggli said the encrypted material uses a DES-based 56-bit key, while a RSA public-key system (1024-bit length) is used for transmission. As Meggle acknowledged, this PIN-pad based identification system could be also used as a way to identify users that send encrypted messages in private communications. The TTPs will have to keep a record of connections -- as all banks are doing today to officially fight fraud -- and give a user's private key to police authorities if called upon to do so. * * * * * CRYPTO UPDATES * French officials at the SCSSI and the prime minister's office are worried that aspects of the government's crypto policy may be regarded by the European Commission in Brussels as an obstacle to common market principles. The government's law outlining a TTP key-recovery system, voted by the legislature last summer, has yet to be enacted by ministerial decree. An initial version of the decree (see lambda 2.13) stated that only French employees (of companies held with a majority of French capital) would be allowed to act as a TTP in the country. Whether the law would violate rules concerning the free flow of capital and workers in the European Union is uncertain. However the French government has something in its favor (for better or for worse) regarding possible anti-competitive practices in this area: The EC is prohibited from making decisions that may overlap with issues of national security. * Meanwhile, the Paris-based OECD is to publish its guidelines on international cryptography procedures (lawful access, condition of TTP systems, etc.) at the end of March. The report has been approved by both the OECD expert group and division committee with slight changes in the wording, and now needs only the endorsement of the OECD Council of Ministers. ---- A report by Jerome Thorel <jt(a)freenix.fr> English rewriting: Ken N. Cukier <100736.3602(a)CompuServe.COM> lambda archives --> www.freenix.fr/netizen ---- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Jerome Thorel Planete Internet Journalist, Paris Editor / Redac chef thorel(a)netpress.fr 191 av A. Briand, 94230 Cachan Tel: 33 1 49085833 - fax-31 www.planete-internet.com

1 0