At 10:32 PM 4/28/01 -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
At 11:46 PM 4/28/2001 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them
offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the
logs only if you are not asking for them under duress.
Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A profound new insight.
We still await some real insights from a real graduate student (!),
beyond her saying that we don't know as much as she says she knows.
BTW, I have removed the additional addresses (David Honig
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Declan@Well. Com [EMAIL
At 11:46 PM 4/28/2001 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them
offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the
logs only if you are not asking for them under duress. (A reasonable
protocol can probably be worked
:46 PM
To: Anonymous
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: layered deception
I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them
offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the
logs only if you are not asking for them under duress. (A reasonable
I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them
offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the
logs only if you are not asking for them under duress. (A reasonable
protocol can probably be worked out. Would a court order instruct you
to lie? If so,
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
Right, in most circumstances you're not required to keep logs. But there
are some cases, albeit a fairly narrow subset, in which you'd want to have
log files that are available to you but not an adversary using legal process.
-Declan
If you
Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, in most circumstances you're not required to keep logs. But
there are some cases, albeit a fairly narrow subset, in which you'd
want to have log files that are available to you but not an
adversary using legal process.
-Declan
Which
To: Anonymous
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: layered deception
I rather like the idea of encrypting the logs on the fly and shipping them
offshore. Your offshore partner will be instructed to turn over the
logs only if you are not asking for them under duress. (A reasonable
I think Matt is a bit too quick to conclude a court will charge the
operator with contempt and that the contempt charge will stick on appeal.
Obviously judges have a lot of discretion, but it doesn't seem to me like
the question is such a clear one if a system is set up in the proper
At 01:04 PM 4/29/2001 -0400, Matthew Gaylor wrote:
Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, in most circumstances you're not required to keep logs. But there
are some cases, albeit a fairly narrow subset, in which you'd want to
have log files that are available to you but not an
10 matches
Mail list logo
