From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932138AbWGRVbn (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:31:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932195AbWGRVbm (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:31:42 -0400 Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu ([128.173.14.107]:26553 "EHLO turing-police.cc.vt.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932138AbWGRVbX (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:31:23 -0400 Message-Id: <200607182131.k6ILVGxt004888@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2 To: Jesper Juhl Cc: Thomas Tuttle , richard.dent@nhs.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OT] Vacation message heckling (Was: Re: Richard Dent - Annual Leave) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:30:04 +0200." <9a8748490607181330q7b7be84i3ac324d9053a5fa4@mail.gmail.com> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <20060718090604.BLR19599@ms03.swi.contact.secure-ops.net> <20060718132704.GA12930@phoenix> <9a8748490607181330q7b7be84i3ac324d9053a5fa4@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1153258276_3104P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:31:16 -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1153258276_3104P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:30:04 +0200, Jesper Juhl said: > Claiming anything send by email is confidential seems completely > rediculous to me. There actually *is* a valid usage case for these disclaimers in *some* cases. If there *is* in fact material covered by lawyer-client or similar privilege, having the disclaimer on *those items alone* can do some good when the other side's legal eagles subpoena all e-mails with the phrase 'Project Wombat' in them - it puts the other side on notice that they shouldn't be looking at that item and it should be returned. It's the same legal theory as subpoenaing all the paper documents, and finding in the 53 boxes, a sheet stamped 'Privileged and Confidential' that accidentally got into box 27 - there's strict rules about what happens then. Of course, paper documents are stamped on the TOP so you stop reading, and not all of them are stamped... :) (And I actually did at one time have dealings with a lawyer who Actually Got It. E-mails re: scheduling and other administrivia didn't have a disclaimer, stuff that was actually sensitive had a very short one at the *top*...) > Perhaps if the email was encrypted I could attach some weight to a > disclaimer like thatt, but sending unencrypted email is like writing on > the back of a postcard - it can be read by a huge number of people in > transit - admins managing the mail servers where it is stored along > the way, people sniffing traffic on the lines it passes through, At least in the US, the law says otherwise. 18 USC 2511 basically says that the admins aren't allowed to blab, and the traffic sniffers are committing a crime already. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002511----000-.html And if you catch them at it, 18 USC 2520 says you can sue them for damages: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002520----000-.html --==_Exmh_1153258276_3104P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFEvVMkcC3lWbTT17ARAkfAAJwLEiImG7oaZ8TyjrL3jwG66PZhqgCdEZJS eJ4unQaQbO9Aaf0SInVK+Jw= =7U8n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1153258276_3104P--