Interesting People mailing list archives
any answers for Dan
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 09:14:08 -0500
------ Forwarded Message From: Dan Gillmor <dgillmor () sjmercury com> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 18:46:07 -0800 To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: Re: <[IP]> MS Final Decree - interesting... Dave, Here's what I said on this last May. http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/columnists/dan_gillm or/ejournal/3223506.htm
I continue to believe the most important part of the section in question is the one that isn't being discussed. It says Microsoft may not release information about "any API, interface or other information related to any Microsoft product if lawfully directed not to do so by a governmental agency of competent jurisdiction." Neither the Justice Department nor Microsoft has given me a straight answer about what this means. The company offered nonsense. The government promised to discuss it but then didn't keep the promise. What if this means Microsoft is party to a U.S. government back-door into Windows, for spying and surveillance purposes, that the government understandably wants to keep secret? Wouldn't you like to know the answer? I would.
Dan
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net> Reply-To: dave () farber net Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 19:03:28 -0500 To: ip <ip () v2 listbox com> Subject: <[IP]> MS Final Decree - interesting... ------ Forwarded Message From: Richard Forno <rforno () infowarrior org> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 16:18:24 -0500 To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: MS Final Decree - interesting... Page 7 of CKK's Final Decree on Microsoft -- No provision of this Final Judgment shall: 1. Require Microsoft to document, disclose or license to third parties: (a) portions of APIs or Documentation or portions or layers of Communications Protocols the disclosure of which would compromise the security of a particular installation or group of installations of anti-piracy, anti-virus, software licensing, digital rights management, encryption or authentication systems, including without limitation, keys, authorization tokens or enforcement criteria; or (b) any API, interface or other information related to any Microsoft product if lawfully directed not to do so by a governmental agency of competent jurisdiction. Does this mean that section (b) hints that USG has a vested interest in some parts of Windows being kept secret??? Conspiracy theories abound, and inquiring minds want to know.... Rick Infowarrior.org ------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as dgillmor () sjmercury com To unsubscribe or update your address, click http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=124862&user_secret=bbddfcfb Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To unsubscribe or update your address, click http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=125275&user_secret=1aa8f2d6 Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- any answers for Dan Dave Farber (Nov 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- any answers for Dan Dave Farber (Nov 04)