On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Kenneth E. Lussier wrote: > Ah, but will there be import restrictions on armored cars, or in this > case, encryption?
That works, too. If the Government bans importing foreign-made armored cars (encryption), it just means US businesses are vulnerable to attack as well. Bank robbers can break through the cardboard panel and take the money. Meanwhile, the Bad Guys continue to use their illegally-modified armored cars without the cardboard panel. (Of course, with encryption, it is actually worse. You can put guards around an armored car. You have no such luxury for Internet traffic.) > Also, what is to stop people from just putting their precious cargo into > UGO? Rational people are unlikely to trust a regular car to protect their goods. Of course, terrorists with a penchant for suicide attacks are not rational. Once again, the law-abiding people lose out, while the Bad Guys win. >> US law already requires people to handle over decrypt keys upon court >> order ... > > Yes, but under the new laws, they won't need a warrant ... Any law that so blatantly violates the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution is unlikely to hold up upon appeal, meaning -- once again -- the Good Guys (who are doing nothing wrong, but get their privacy violated) lose, while the Bad Guys win, since the evidence in the evidence in the case would be inadmissible. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ********************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **********************************************************
