At 04:29 PM 2/7/03 -0500, Steve Furlong wrote:
...
Legal question: If Alice selected and used a system in which she
wouldn't be _able_ to provide the decryption key or the decrypted
documents on demand, would she still be liable under contempt or
criminal charges for not providing them? Maybe she
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Steve Furlong wrote:
> I'd be more interested in a system in which I didn't have access to my
> own key. Warrant-proof, contempt-proof and preferably rubber
> hose-proof. Maybe a decryption program connected to a voice stress
> analyzer.
If you don't have access then someone e
On Friday 07 February 2003 16:22, Mike Rosing wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> > If secret searches with secret warrants are legal now, what good is
> > it to use public key encryption and keep a backup of your private
> > key at home on a floppy?
> >
> > Is there a protocol t
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> If secret searches with secret warrants are legal now, what good is it
> to use public key encryption and keep a backup of your private key at
> home on a floppy?
>
> Is there a protocol to have a "blinded" private key, so you wouldn't
> actually have
If secret searches with secret warrants are legal now, what good is it
to use public key encryption and keep a backup of your private key at
home on a floppy?
Is there a protocol to have a "blinded" private key, so you wouldn't
actually have access to your own private key?
--
michael cardenas