In the following class action, I infer from the plantiffs (alleged) assertions
that
(a) internet mail is addressed to persons, rather than accounts/terminals
(b) the service thereby alludes to the protections of first class mail,
being personally addressed
(c) confidentiality is a function of envelope labelling
(d) confidentiality marking entails a privacy right wrt the content
(e) privacy is not a function of communication but a property of the
originator(s)/recipient(s)' information channel
The class action is not concerned with the above issues, being concerned
rather with seizure of an entire bbs and thereby claimed abuse of
US constitutional rights. However, a number of issues
are interesting as motivations for MOSS comment:-
(a) false technical claims regarding assumed addressing and confidentiality
properties, particularly for the underlying technology regarding Internet
mail gateways and endpoints
(b) there is an assumption of security-labels (headers) being transferred across
mail relays without change, and of systems handling these conformantly
(c) first class mail is internationally-standardized channel, defined legally,
and for which postal inspectorates world-wide have investigative powers to
seize and otherwise intervene where pornographic material is suspected of
being transferred.
So, assuming that email enjoys first class status, and that
a USPS certificate is used in a MOSS/PGP system to provide for a confidentiality
mechanism supporting personal communication, then the postal inspectorate
may have a right to investigate the content where they suspect the information
channel is being used to to transfer pornography or other illicit data.
Does this mean USPS have a right to the relevant keying material - gained either
from an escrow or user source?
Does a user who chooses to use a USPS CA service delegate to the inspectorate
access rights to the keying material on specific account of having chosen
USPS over a private industry CA?
This argument is just a bit of fun, folks. But its an interesting case on
account of the nature of the privacy argument involving a whole class of
technology - the Internet email system and originator-recipient information
exchange.
Peter.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
STEVEN GUEST ... Plaintiffs,
: vs. :
SIMON L. LEIS, JR., HAMILTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, ...
i. Private electronic mail or "e-mail."
38. The CCC BBS provided subscribers the ability to send
and receive private electronic communications, typically known as
e-mail. A subscriber could compose private electronic messages
either before "logging on" to the CCC, or while connected to the
bulletin board system. Just like First Class mail, e-mail
messages are addressed to a specific person, and are
confidential.
...
below). If the sender designated a conference message
"confidential," the message remained inaccessible to any user
except the designated recipient. The CCC BBS also provided an
"Internet mail gateway." This feature allowed subscribers to
send and receive confidential electronic communications from
persons who did not have an account on the CCC BBS, but who had
an Internet address. This Internet mail gateway allowed the
users of the CCC BBS to send confidential electronic
communications to, and receive them from, tens of millions of
persons around the world.
40. This e-mail was not readily accessible to the public.