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: