Is virus scanning interception - The final word??

[Andrew Cormack]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk 
> [mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk] On Behalf Of 
> Roland Perry
> Sent: 06 August 2002 08:50
> To: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: Re: Is virus scanning interception - The final word??
>
> You are correct that the OIC isn't interested in ISPs 
> scanning viruses, because their code *only* applies to 
> actions of employers.
> 
> As such, I'm mainly interested in removing the [erroneous in 
> any event] reference to employers' automated virus scanning 
> in order to prevent the misguided from mentioning it as 
> evidence that OIC have an opinion on ISPs' automated virus 
> scanning. Which they don't.
> -- 

A good reason, and can I (without re-igniting the whole debate) suggest
two more? When I originally saw the statement, I had two concerns:

1) users who will read that virus scanning is interception, and know
that all interception is illegal (they've never *read* the Act) and so
will turn off their virus scanning;
2) users who will read that virus scanning is interception, and deduce
that since virus scanning is generally acceptable then so are all other
forms of interception.

Don't tell me those aren't logical, 'cos *I* know they aren't, but I
know users who would cling to both despite all argument. And the
Internet would be an even worse place as a result :-(

Deleting the offending line would resolve both

Cheers
Andrew