On 2012-02-25 7:28 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote: > The first point, not addressed in your note but quite > important to the ruling, is that the key has to be > something you know, not something you have. If the keying > material is on a smart card, you have to turn that over and > you're not protected. If a PIN plus smart card is needed, > you still have to turn over the smart card but not disclose > the PIN.
Surely the core of the ruling is that no one except the defendant knows for sure whether the key exists, knows whether there is an inner truecrypt volume or not. The cross examination of the forensics witness focused on that point. _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
