C'punks, I just wrote Phil about the Washington Post interview. The following is his response:
The journalist slightly misinterpreted my remarks, and missed the shades of grey in some of what I said. I did *not* say that I was overwhelmed with guilt over PGP. I told her about my crying, just as everyone else I knew had cried over what had happened. I also told her about the hate mail, and that I "felt bad" that the terrorists may have used PGP. Indeed I do feel bad about that. But feeling bad about them using it is not the same as feeling that PGP was a mistake, or that I have changed my principles about human rights and crypto. I thought I had also made it clear that I had no regrets about developing PGP. She did not report any individual facts incorrectly in her article. But I think she connected the dots in a slightly different way, and seemed to conclude that I was wallowing in guilt over PGP. I'm sure she meant no harm.
I am still very much aware that PGP was a good thing, and that strong crypto helps more than hurts. I have been saying that to the press all week. I just said it again in two more interviews I had before breakfast this morning, and will continue to say it. It seems I have to say it more forcefully.
I will prepare a statement on this later today. In the meantime, feel free to let our colleagues know that I have not gone soft on civil liberties.
Regards, Phil
Sandy can you make sure you post Phils response here. Thanks in advance. joe On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
C'punks,
I just wrote Phil about the Washington Post interview. The following is his response:
The journalist slightly misinterpreted my remarks, and missed the shades of grey in some of what I said. I did *not* say that I was overwhelmed with guilt over PGP. I told her about my crying, just as everyone else I knew had cried over what had happened. I also told her about the hate mail, and that I "felt bad" that the terrorists may have used PGP. Indeed I do feel bad about that. But feeling bad about them using it is not the same as feeling that PGP was a mistake, or that I have changed my principles about human rights and crypto. I thought I had also made it clear that I had no regrets about developing PGP. She did not report any individual facts incorrectly in her article. But I think she connected the dots in a slightly different way, and seemed to conclude that I was wallowing in guilt over PGP. I'm sure she meant no harm.
I am still very much aware that PGP was a good thing, and that strong crypto helps more than hurts. I have been saying that to the press all week. I just said it again in two more interviews I had before breakfast this morning, and will continue to say it. It seems I have to say it more forcefully.
I will prepare a statement on this later today. In the meantime, feel free to let our colleagues know that I have not gone soft on civil liberties.
Regards, Phil
-- The dot.GOD Registry, Limited http://www.dot-god.com/
participants (2)
-
baptista＠pccf.net -
Sandy Sandfort