Re: [PLUG] how to lose your rights and freedom...

[Fred K Ollinger <follinge@sas.upenn.edu>]

I agree that one will be held in contempt if the "lose" their keys.
However, if you are committing a crime, and you are caught, you are
screwed anyway, so I don't see why there needs to be a separate law for
this.

On a more frightening note, part of the _proposed_ Patriot II suggests
stripping citizenship for _suspected_ terrorists. If you aren't a citizen
then you don't get rights. I guess you'd also instantly become an illegal
alien, though I suspect that would be the least of your worries.

I guess that the point of this is, that it matters less what the words on
the lawbooks say and more on how the people who interpret the laws define
those words.

Anyway, I do agree that encryption is an envelope to an email's postcard.

Fred Ollinger (follinge@sas.upenn.edu)
CCN sysadmin

On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Arthur S. Alexion wrote:

> On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 06:42, gabriel rosenkoetter wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:14:31PM -0500, Paul wrote:
> >
> > > Having knowledge of encryption could be compared to having the
> > > tools to commit a crime, especially when encryption itself is a
> > > crime.
> >
> > First, no, having knowledge can only be compared to having
> > knowledge. We don't lock locksmiths up because they know how to pick
> > a lock.
> >
> > Second, no, having tools is not a crime, as my legally purchased and
> > legally owned lockpick set demonstrates.
> >
> > Your worry, then, is that the government will MAKE having tools be
> > illegal; that won't fly. That's presumptive guilt, against most
> > things our judicial system stands for. And if there's anything that
> > moves slower than the US legislature, it's the US judicial system.
> >
>
> The Pennsylvania crime known as PIC (Possession of an Instrument of
> Crime) does create a separate, additional, and independent crime and
> penalty for merely using an "instrument" to commit a crime.  I would bet
> that a smart prosecutor could argue that cryptography can be an
> "instrument of crime".  (I haven't yet heard of it happening, but
> someday...)  A client was held for court on PIC charges on Thursday for
> having an otherwise legal baseball bat, an official Louisville Slugger.
> She was not accused of hitting a few balls with it though, but rather
> using it on her husband's mistress.  However, even a gun is not an
> "instrument of crime" unless it is used in the commission of some other
> crime.  There is a lot to be scared of with Herr General Ashcroft
> calling the shots in the Bushreich, but using cryptography in the
> commission of another crime is not one of them.  It is probably already
> illegal.
>
> --
> Arthur S. Alexion <arthur@alexion.com>
> Arthur S. Alexion LLC
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group        --       http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion  --   http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group        --       http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug