🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <064303Z02121993@anon.penet.fi> an54588@anon.penet.fi
writes:

	   Since version 2.1, PGP ("Pretty Good Privacy") has been
	   rigged to
   allow the NSA to easily break encoded messages. Early in 1992, the
   author, Paul Zimmerman, was arrested by Government agents. He was
   told that he would be set up for trafficking narcotics unless he
   complied. The Government agency's demands were simple: He was to
   put a virtually undetectable trapdoor, designed by the NSA, into
   all future releases of PGP, and to tell no-one.

Has anyone heard from other sources, including the media, regarding
this issue? Are there any court records that back up this claim?

	   After reading this, you may think of using an earlier
	   version of
   PGP. However, any version found on an FTP site or bulletin board
   has been doctored. Only use copies acquired before 1992, and do NOT
   use a recent compiler to compile them. Virtually ALL popular
   compilers have been modified to insert the trapdoor (consisting of
   a few trivial changes) into any version of PGP prior to
   2.1. Members of the boards of Novell, Microsoft, Borland, AT&T and
   other companies were persuaded into giving the order for the
   modification (each ot these companies' boards contains at least one
   Trilateral Commission member or Bilderberg Committee attendant).

	   It took the agency more to modify GNU C, but eventually
	   they did it.
   The Free Software Foundation was threatened with "an IRS
   investigation", in other words, with being forced out of business,
   unless they complied. The result is that all versions of GCC on the
   FTP sites and all versions above 2.2.3, contain code to modify PGP
   and insert the trapdoor. Recompiling GCC with itself will not help;
   the code is inserted by the compiler into itself. Recompiling with
   another compiler may help, as long as the compiler is older than
   from 1992.

I have a hard time believing that all producers of C compilers went
along with this! It poses a serious breach of fiduciary trust between
the software developers and end users. To legal experts: are there any
legal grounds to disallow such modifications of software without
documentation?

   Distribute and reproduce this information freely. Do not alter it.

I suggest to everyone that they "take this with a grain of salt," and
search for other corroberating evidence, before they propogate this
information. This smells like propoganda to me. It doesn't help that
it was sent by an anonymous user, either.


--
   |     ----+		From the Towers Of Terror...
  -|--+ /   /|		George Feil
 / | /|+----+|		feil@sbcm.com
+----+||    ||		voice: 212-524-8059    fax: 212-524-8081
|    |||    ||		opinions expressed are not those of SBCM, Inc.