CDR: ZKS, government regulation, and new "privacy" laws

[Declan McCullagh]

On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 05:59:56PM -0500, Adam Shostack wrote:
> When we say 'nasty l-word' you can assume we're refering to CALEA,
> RIP, and that sort of thing.  When we talk about legislative
> compliance, we mean complying with that whole slew of privacy laws.
> 
> As to the hypothetical that Tim will ask, we'll work very hard to
> prevent laws requiring key escrow from coming into being.  We spend
> time and energy maintaining relations with law enforcement in a lot of 
> places, explaining to them why we don't build in back doors.  And,
> suprisingly, when you go and talk to them, rather than hissing and
> shouting, they listen.

Adam, 

I believe you. I can't see ZKS supporting CALEA/RIP/etc

But ZKS appears to be all in favor of "data protection" legislation
(EU data directive, Canadian legislation) that regulates business'
privacy practices. This makes sense: It's apparently Austin's personal
view, and the more data collection regulations companies must abide
by, the more incentive they have to buy your product.

You've placed yourself in the unusual position of directly benefiting
from additional government regulations. I would expect that your
lobbyists will step up their efforts in ths area (one lawyer who does
work for you here in DC is a vocal supporter of such private-sector
regulation).

-Declan