Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Peter! On Monday, November 15, 2004 at 5:22:33 PM you wrote: > Seems I'm not well informed enough on this topic, because at least > German laws allow you to don't say anything if you're a suspicious, so > you wouldn't even have to tell your password/passphrase. Two things, one - before my words get misconstrued through history -, when I wrote "good" it was meant sarcastic. To your question, currently such laws as the discussed ones have only partially been passed in Germany. But they are being discussed, as readers of the German computer magazine *c't* are well aware of. I hope there will be enough free-thinking and reasonable people here opposing all those nonsense. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish. (David Hume) Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Peter!
On Monday, November 15, 2004, 10:22 AM, you wrote:
GF>>> Just like that? Just by wishing? You have absolutely no right to
GF>>> privacy or their desires must come with a good reason to demand
GF>>> your key?
DH>> The good reason is called "anti-terrorism", or "save out
DH>> children".
PP> Any more information on where this demand is regulated? Seems I'm
PP> not well informed enough on this topic, because at least German
PP> laws allow you to don't say anything if you're a suspicious, so
PP> you wouldn't even have to tell your password/passphrase.
In the U.S., you could refuse. Then the law enforcement officers could
take you to court.
Then you could decline to answer on the grounds, given in the 5th
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, that the answer might incriminate
you.
The judge in the case could then issue an order granting you immunity
from prosecution of any law-breaking of yours which might come to
light as a result of your answer.
If you still refused to answer, he could declare you in "Contempt of
Court" and order you to be incarcerated in jail until such time as you
did agree to answer.
This has actually happened, and it has also happened to journalists
who refused to disclose their sources and were declared in "Contempt
of Court."
PP> Can't imagine right now how these two ("Right to get necessary
PP> information for decrypting" vs. "Right to keep quiet") come
PP> together ...
See above. In the U.S., this is how they come together.
--
Best regards,
Mary
The Bat 3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2
Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first -
http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Dierk,
PMFJI.
On Saturday, November 13, 2004 at 9:33:17 AM Dierk [DH] wrote:
>> Just like that? Just by wishing? You have absolutely no right to
>> privacy or their desires must come with a good reason to demand your
>> key?
DH> The good reason is called "anti-terrorism", or "save out children".
Any more information on where this demand is regulated?
Seems I'm not well informed enough on this topic, because at least
German laws allow you to don't say anything if you're a suspicious, so
you wouldn't even have to tell your password/passphrase.
Can't imagine right now how these two ("Right to get necessary
information for decrypting" vs. "Right to keep quiet") come together ...
--
Regards
Peter Palmreuther
(The Bat! v3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2)
This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice.
Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first -
http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Dierk! On Monday, November 15, 2004, 2:03 AM, you wrote: AY>> You send an encrypted message, but on the other end someone - even AY>> someone you trust - could decrypt the message and leave it lying AY>> around in decrypted form. DH> Which brings us back to TB and its handling of encrypted messages. DH> Somebody suggested to give us the option of saving a decrypted DH> message. I am against it, exactly for Avi's reason. I am against that option, also. I would not save a decrypted message even if I could, but we are all subject to human error and inadvertently saving it comes to the same thing as saving it "in the clear" deliberately. -- Best regards, Mary The Bat 3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Avi! On Monday, November 15, 2004 at 1:36:38 AM you wrote: > You send an encrypted message, but on the other end someone - even > someone you trust - could decrypt the message and leave it lying > around in decrypted form. Which brings us back to TB and its handling of encrypted messages. Somebody suggested to give us the option of saving a decrypted message. I am against it, exactly for Avi's reason. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request Be contend with what you get, and what you get will be contend with you. (Derek Leveret) Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:53:19 +1100, Ian A. White wrote: > Then again it is a telltale that your baggage has been tampered with, > but we digress here ;-) Well, yes, I did get a speeding ticket the day before I flew. Would that be enough cause? But then maybe you are thinking of my history as an Australian... but here we definitely digress. :-) What were we talking about anyway? Ah, yes, encrypting mail and national law. Well, my rule is simple. I have PGP but mostly use it for decryption and to satisfy the desire of others. Even in PGP, the same rule applies for me. The rule is: Don't write anything sensitive. After all, you don't have as much security as some people might think, even with PGP. You send an encrypted message, but on the other end someone - even someone you trust - could decrypt the message and leave it lying around in decrypted form. There is an old maxim: Say a thousand things, but don't put anything in writing. The spirit of this is well worth remembering. If anyone follows it, then it should not disturb her/him to use a freemail server like Gmail. Personally, when I write a message, I just assume that anyone might come along and read it and that it could be still available for reading long after I have "shuffled off this mortal coil". Anything that comes my way that is really sensitive, I just delete after reading. What happens to that mail on Internet service providers that process it is beyond my control. -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro 3.0.2.4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Ethan, Sunday, November 14, 2004, 1:07:40 PM, Ethan J. Mings wrote: > With all due respect, why are issues of airport security being > discussed on this list. Travel in and out of the US is an issue yet I > really feel this over the top for this list. > Can it please go off line. Although I may agree with a lot of the thought process here (i.e. individuals rights to privacy which I can totally relate) with all due respect this should be on TBOT. If we were discussing PGP &/or GnuPG in TB it would be a totally different matter. IMHO the problem in the US is people to a substantial degree are being motivated by fear which I feel the politicians are fueling for political gain to a substantial degree. When an individual's rights are being infringed upon people seem to be looking the other way when it doesn't involve them. I guess people have a choice to act in such a way. My only question is what happens when the day comes and it does involve them. -- Best Regards, Greg Strong Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[4]: Encrypting mail and national law
Batters: > On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:24:36 -0500, Dennis Hays wrote: > Anyway, Dennis, you either missed my point or studiously ignored it. > We are talking about the right to privacy. And I was saying that there > was no apparent reason why the TSA had to break my lock when all that > was required was for them to request me to open it. San Jose is not a > huge airport with an immense amount of traffic. My bag was searched > after clearing the x-ray inspection and outside of my presence for > absolutely no good reason. If your bag was a carry-on, you certainly had the right for them to request you open it, rather than they breaking your lock. If your bag was checked baggage, then the TSA in the "back-room" are the ones that broke your lock and they, to my knowledge, ever come above ground to inquire nicely for you to open anything. > Look, I live in Israel. The United States learned most of its airline > security techniques from Israel. But in Israel, no one will break into > your bag when they can get you to open it for them. And in Israel, no > one will search your bag outside of your presence when they can just > as easily do it in your presence. I can't answer for the TSA techniques, but I can say there is an undercurrent in this country starting to ask some serious questions about matters such as this. > As for the broken lock, when so much money is being spent on security > in the U.S, why not spend a few dollars more to replace the locks that > are broken in such an unnecessarily crude and invasive fashion? I'd be right behind you in trying to get an answer to this. `--[end quote] -- Dennis Hays/Haysdesign License: http://www.haysdesign.com/license 11/14/2004 at 2:03 PM (-5 UTC) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows 2000 5.| 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
Sunday, November 14, 2004, 1:11:29 PM, you wrote: > Dennis, in response to your screech of dismay, I was a visitor to the > U.S. How could I be expected to know what type of locks to buy... or > that I need to buy a special type of lock? And this happened almost > two years ago. Perhaps those special TSA locks were not introduced > back then. With all due respect, why are issues of airport security being discussed on this list. Travel in and out of the US is an issue yet I really feel this over the top for this list. Can it please go off line. Jerry -- Ethan J. Mings Principal, The Desk Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:24:36 -0500, Dennis Hays wrote: > While I do understand, there is a known saying in US law, "Ignorance of > the law is no excuse". Yes, but sometimes a remark from Charles Dickens seems more appropriate: "If the law supposes that, the law is an ass." Anyway, Dennis, you either missed my point or studiously ignored it. We are talking about the right to privacy. And I was saying that there was no apparent reason why the TSA had to break my lock when all that was required was for them to request me to open it. San Jose is not a huge airport with an immense amount of traffic. My bag was searched after clearing the x-ray inspection and outside of my presence for absolutely no good reason. Look, I live in Israel. The United States learned most of its airline security techniques from Israel. But in Israel, no one will break into your bag when they can get you to open it for them. And in Israel, no one will search your bag outside of your presence when they can just as easily do it in your presence. As for the broken lock, when so much money is being spent on security in the U.S, why not spend a few dollars more to replace the locks that are broken in such an unnecessarily crude and invasive fashion? -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro 3.0.2.4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Dennis! On Sunday, November 14, 2004 at 7:24:36 PM you wrote: > While I do understand, there is a known saying in US law, "Ignorance of > the law is no excuse". Same in Germoney. Nevertheless, I was always convinced this can only apply to obvious crimes and misdemeanours. There's many complicated and arcane laws making it hard to keep track even for seasoned legal eagles. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions. (Albert Einstein) Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
Batters: > Dennis, in response to your screech of dismay, I was a visitor to the > U.S. How could I be expected to know what type of locks to buy... or > that I need to buy a special type of lock? And this happened almost > two years ago. Perhaps those special TSA locks were not introduced > back then. --snipped- `--[end quote] While I do understand, there is a known saying in US law, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". And, in light of Ashcroft and now maybe Gonzales, I don't see it getting better. They have yet to address email protective measure, such as PGP, for instance, but heck, give them a chance. Dennis -- Dennis Hays/Haysdesign License: http://www.haysdesign.com/license 11/14/2004 at 1:21 PM (-5 UTC) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows 2000 5.| 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:59:19 +0100, MaXxX wrote: > I care little for whether they lock or unlock or re-lock or > whatever-lock my bag. I am specifically asking about repayment for > intentional damage done. If airlines (at least those that care for the > customer) often repay for luggage damaged during transport, why > doesn't TSA repay for luggage damaged intentionally? Dennis, in response to your screech of dismay, I was a visitor to the U.S. How could I be expected to know what type of locks to buy... or that I need to buy a special type of lock? And this happened almost two years ago. Perhaps those special TSA locks were not introduced back then. Anyway, here is the relevant excerpt from the note that was attached to my broken lock. Please keep in mind that I watched my x-rayed bag go through and that if anyone wanted to open the bag they only had to ask me to open it. And why did my personal property have to be searched outside of my presence? Something about this smacks of presumption of guilt rather than presumption of innocence. I quote: "If the TSA screenner was unable to open your bag for inspection because it was locked, the screener may have been forced to break the locks on your bag. TSA sincerely regrets having to do this, and has taken care to reseal your bag upon completion of inspection. However, TSA is not liable for damage to your locks resulting from this necessary security precaution." -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro 3.0.2.4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
Batters: > On Sunday, November 14, 2004, at 5:54:18 PM, a fearless knight known > as Dennis Hays entered the dragon's lair and exclaimed: >> While odd, it does happen. The TSA "requests" the use of approved >> locks they can unlock and re-lock. > I care little for whether they lock or unlock or re-lock or > whatever-lock my bag. I am specifically asking about repayment for > intentional damage done. If airlines (at least those that care for the > customer) often repay for luggage damaged during transport, why > doesn't TSA repay for luggage damaged intentionally? `--[end quote] You can make a claim for missing baggage through the normal airlines. As for missing items, TSA does have a claim form, but for intentionally broken locks, as to gain access to the baggage contents; no. You will not get reimbursed for your lock. See: http://www.tsa.gov/public/interapp/travel_tip/travel_tip_0038.xml Dennis -- Dennis Hays/Haysdesign License: http://www.haysdesign.com/license 11/14/2004 at 1:08 PM (-5 UTC) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows 2000 5.| 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
On Sunday, November 14, 2004, at 5:54:18 PM, a fearless knight known as Dennis Hays entered the dragon's lair and exclaimed: > While odd, it does happen. The TSA "requests" the use of approved > locks they can unlock and re-lock. I care little for whether they lock or unlock or re-lock or whatever-lock my bag. I am specifically asking about repayment for intentional damage done. If airlines (at least those that care for the customer) often repay for luggage damaged during transport, why doesn't TSA repay for luggage damaged intentionally? -- .^,".sinPi, ICQ 3.146019 -\---/---X---/-> `_'|`_' Flyin' high with The Bat! v3.0.1.33 over the swamps of Windows 2000 5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
Batters: > On Sunday, November 14, 2004, at 2:53:08 AM, Avi Yashar jumped on the > stage, took a mike and sang: >> They gave the broken lock back to me with a note attached saying >> that they had done it and that they were not liable for the damage. > That is highly odd. Had the lock been a valuable one, perhaps > constructed in a unique and expensive way... Does the law allow for > private property to be destroyed on the basis of unconfirmed suspicion > and without any attempt to repay the owner? Some law. `--[end quote] While odd, it does happen. The TSA "requests" the use of approved locks they can unlock and re-lock. See: http://www.tsa.gov/public/interapp/editorial/editorial_1634.xml Dennis -- Dennis Hays/Haysdesign License: http://www.haysdesign.com/license 11/14/2004 at 11:52 AM (-5 UTC) Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows 2000 5.| 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
On Sunday, November 14, 2004, at 2:53:08 AM, Avi Yashar jumped on the stage, took a mike and sang: > They gave the broken lock back to me with a note attached saying > that they had done it and that they were not liable for the damage. That is highly odd. Had the lock been a valuable one, perhaps constructed in a unique and expensive way... Does the law allow for private property to be destroyed on the basis of unconfirmed suspicion and without any attempt to repay the owner? Some law. -- .^,".sinPi, ICQ 3.146019 -\---/---X---/-> `_'|`_' Flyin' high with The Bat! v3.0.1.33 over the swamps of Windows 2000 5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello rmorris & everyone else on 14-Nov-2004 at 03:53:13 (GMT +0100), you wrote: > Where can I learn about using e-mail encrypting? I have read a lot of > posts on this and its getting me curious. One widespread solution for mail encryption is PGP. It doesn't cover the most recent versions per se (but what is said about v5.x of PGP mostly applies to the most recent versions, too): http://www.cam.ac.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/pgp-faq/ More hits: http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=utf8&q=pgp+faq -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) using v3.0.2.7 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 Science is a world of most unlikely truths. And if we have found that it works, we have only to thank the imaginative courage of men who were willing to fly in the face of their five senses, from the day of Galileo, to the day of Einstein. -- Jacob Bronowski Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello rmorris, Saturday, November 13, 2004, 20:36:10, you wrote: r> Where can I learn about using e-mail encrypting? I have read a lot r> of posts on this and its getting me curious. For a pretty good treatment on it, have a look at 'Network Security - Private Communication in a Public World', Kaufman, C., Perlman, R., Speciner, M., Prentice Hall 2002. It covers the ideas, motivations, pitfalls, etc, with just a bit of mathematics. For a more formal treatment see 'Handbook of Applied Cryptography', Menezes, A., Van Oorschot, P., Vanstone, S., CRC Press, 1996. Also good are all of Bruce Schneier's books. Highly recommended. - -- ..hggdh.. Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 and BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) Comment: public key at pgp.mit.edu iD8DBQFBltFgVFMjkob7xf8RAivuAKCgj5brm/GYQJQ+fsIryB1uQEAHygCeKp1D cn7mjwR8yphIE3//D5tXBCo= =Y+bU -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello rmorris, Saturday, November 13, 2004, 8:36:10 PM, rmorris wrote: > Where can I learn about using e-mail encrypting? I have read a lot of > posts on this and its getting me curious. I would suggest you learn about about PGP or GnuPG by subscribing to PGP Basics which is a Yahoo group. I don't believe you have to be a Yahoo Groups member, and can just join by sending an email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you don't like it just send email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TB has some PGP encryption support built in. Other on this and TBUDL are more knowledgable in this area. I'm sure others may have better suggestions. -- Best Regards, Greg Strong Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Avi, Saturday, November 13, 2004, 7:53:08 PM, you wrote: AY> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:18:36 -0600, hggdh wrote: >> Privacy does not really exist in the US. There is a lot of hot air >> vented around the idea, but no real privacy -- it's bad for business. AY> Though it seems to be totally OT (unless someone can come up with an AY> abstract way of relating this to beta testing, I nevertheless have to AY> agree with hggdh (what a mouthful) on this point. Where can I learn about using e-mail encrypting? I have read a lot of posts on this and its getting me curious. -- Best regards, RMorris TheBat!3.0.2.7 Professional Edition www.ritlabs.com AntiSpam-Bayes Filter Plugin v1.5.6 & BayesIt! 0.7.3 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:18:36 -0600, hggdh wrote: > Privacy does not really exist in the US. There is a lot of hot air > vented around the idea, but no real privacy -- it's bad for business. Though it seems to be totally OT (unless someone can come up with an abstract way of relating this to beta testing, I nevertheless have to agree with hggdh (what a mouthful) on this point. On a trip to the U.S. about two years ago, I took a short commuter flight from San Jose to Los Angeles. On arrival in LA, I was shocked to find that the the TSA (Transport Security Administration) had broken the lock on my bag. They gave the broken lock back to me with a note attached saying that they had done it and that they were not liable for the damage. But what was so infuriating is that San Jose is just a small airport. If anyone wanted to search my bag, they could have asked me to unlock it. They could have searched the bag in my presence. -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro 3.0.2.5 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Gonçalo, Saturday, November 13, 2004, 01:30:28, you wrote: GF> Just like that? Just by wishing? You have absolutely no GF> right to privacy or their desires must come with a good reason GF> to demand your key? Privacy does not really exist in the US. There is a lot of hot air vented around the idea, but no real privacy -- it's bad for business. Europe is, in general, much more strict... -- ..hggdh.. Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 and BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 pgpeKU3Iu7awC.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law - rather OT
Hello hggdh! On Saturday, November 13, 2004 at 5:28:33 PM you wrote: > What was it, again, this guy Ben Franklin once said, about liberty, > rights, etc? He that would exchange liberty for temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety. (Benjamin Franklin) Can't cite it often enough nowadays. BTW, what is now called Patriot Act in the US went other quite another name during the mid-30s-mid-40s in Germany. And this is not just hyperbolic rhetoric, which can be proven by anybody looking into the history and text of the Ermächtigungsgesetz. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request I learn each day what I need to know to do tomorrow's work. (Arnold Toynbee) Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law - rather OT
Hello Mary, long time... Saturday, November 13, 2004, 06:54:09, you wrote: MB> As no doubt was made clear earlier, in the U.S. this law exists, MB> too, and for the reason just given above. And also the right, just MB> confirmed on this thread as existing in Great Britain, to view MB> encrypted material on hard drives. But to seize a hard drive in MB> the U.S. for that purpose, it's my understanding that a court MB> order must still be obtained. However, the U.S. "Patriot Act" MB> seems to be under continual re-interpretation. Yes indeed. In the US a court order has to exist. But it may be sealed (meaning you cannot get to it, read it, or have your councellor/barrister read and counter the order), if it is given under the Patriot Act. See, for example, the now famous IndyMedia case, where hardrives were collected from IndyMedia servers from US and UK (and possibly other places). The UK government will not comment on the case, and in the US, a court order exists, but cannot be discussed. No charges have been made against IndyMedia (to my knowledge). But, still, charges *may* be brought in the future. BTW, the harddrives have been returned, seemingly intact. Also, the enforcement agency (usually the FBI in the US, I guess) can receive a 'blanket' warrant, allowing it to go to your home/office/whatever, and collect anything and everything that the enforcement agents consider interesting. That means, then, the harddrives, the CDROMs, any and all pieces of paper found, the trash can, the contents of the shelves, your cell, etc. You will not have a chance of calling in witnesses, and to argue on what can be collected. And, done that, if an encrypted file is found, you may be required to provide the keyphrase. And... you yourself do not know _why_. It is, after all, National Security. Need-to-know and all of that. It may happen that later they find nothing against you, and all collected materials will be returned. This may take some years (see Steve Jackson, some years ago -- and this was _before_ the Patriot Act!). By this point in time, if you depended on the collected material to survive, you are already under... Encryption of data will, then increase your privacy in relation to your peers, not in relation to the government. No key escrow is actually required in this process, since refusal to provide the encryption keys is a tacit admission of guilt. The most astonishing piece of it all is that you can be sued without actually knowing the real contents of the charges, and without being able to see/discuss/counter incriminating evidence collected against you. What was it, again, this guy Ben Franklin once said, about liberty, rights, etc? -- ..hggdh.. Using The Bat! v3.0.2.6 and BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 pgp2aLIrWpHFn.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Dierk! On Saturday, November 13, 2004, 2:33 AM, you wrote: GF>> Just like that? Just by wishing? You have absolutely no right to GF>> privacy or their desires must come with a good reason to demand GF>> your key? DH> The good reason is called "anti-terrorism", or "save out children". As no doubt was made clear earlier, in the U.S. this law exists, too, and for the reason just given above. And also the right, just confirmed on this thread as existing in Great Britain, to view encrypted material on hard drives. But to seize a hard drive in the U.S. for that purpose, it's my understanding that a court order must still be obtained. However, the U.S. "Patriot Act" seems to be under continual re-interpretation. Still, I value the means to encrypt offered by The Bat! There are lots of good reasons for wanting to protect the privacy of one's records. -- Best regards, Mary The Bat 3.0.2.6 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Gonçalo! On Saturday, November 13, 2004 at 8:30:28 AM you wrote: > Just like that? Just by wishing? You have absolutely no right to > privacy or their desires must come with a good reason to demand your > key? The good reason is called "anti-terrorism", or "save out children". Sometimes I do understand the Montana Militia ... -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request Political revolutions do not often accomplish anything of genuine value; their one undoubted effect is simply to throw out one gang of thieves and put in another. (H.L. Mencken) Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: Encrypting mail and national law
MDP> Dear Tony, MDP> @12-Nov-2004, 22:08 Tony Boom [TB] in MDP> mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Dierk: DH>>> had it already implemented. Or the US. TB>> It's been so for a long while. MDP> Yes - for encrypted data of any kind. Should the government wish to MDP> read your encrypted data, they may indeed demand your key and pass MDP> phrase with which to do so. Just like that? Just by wishing? You have absolutely no right to privacy or their desires must come with a good reason to demand your key? Best regards, Goncalo Farias -- Most men never get much older than twelve. Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Dear Hendrik, @13-Nov-2004, 11:38 +1100 (13-Nov 00:38 UK time) Hendrik Oesterlin [HO] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck: DH had it already implemented. Or the US. TB>>> It's been so for a long while. >> Yes - for encrypted data of any kind. Should the government wish to >> read your encrypted data, they may indeed demand your key and pass >> phrase with which to do so. HO> And this is applicable law in the United Kingdom??? Yes. -- Cheers -- //.arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator and fellow end user TB! v3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 ' pgpkPM1BigymN.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 "Marck D Pearlstone" wrotes on 13/11/2004 at 09:16:00 +1100 subject "Encrypting mail and national law" : DH>>> had it already implemented. Or the US. TB>> It's been so for a long while. > Yes - for encrypted data of any kind. Should the government wish to > read your encrypted data, they may indeed demand your key and pass > phrase with which to do so. And this is applicable law in the United Kingdom??? - -- Sincerely Hendrik Oesterlin - email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber-IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ 215599852 - MSN [EMAIL PROTECTED] - YIM moimeme666fr - AIM moimeme666fr TheBat! 3.0.1.33 and BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows 2000 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.2.2 Comment: "OpenPGP" iQA/AwUBQZVXfsZ91a5PorN5EQLTlACg8WeRQUQ7xNhbXkU1dxmoeReaKO0AoK8O 1n1kuYtd7YE9AZFVfMqe8Kkr =RmWC -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Dear Tony, @12-Nov-2004, 22:08 Tony Boom [TB] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Dierk: DH>> had it already implemented. Or the US. TB> It's been so for a long while. Yes - for encrypted data of any kind. Should the government wish to read your encrypted data, they may indeed demand your key and pass phrase with which to do so. -- Cheers -- //.arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator and fellow end user TB! v3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 ' pgpGOaeQaMP6J.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Dierk, A reminder of what Dierk Haasis on TBBETA typed on: 12 November 2004 at 23:00:51 GMT +0100 DH> Seriously? Oh yes, very serious. DH> I didn't know England (you are from GB, aren't you?) I certainly am, London to be exact but I moved to Peterborough 25 years ago. DH> had it already implemented. Or the US. It's been so for a long while. It's OK to use it for signing but, well I don't know really, Marck would be the best one to ask as me and PGP have never really got on. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 12/11/2004 at 22:04 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Encrypting mail and national law
Hello Tony! On Friday, November 12, 2004 at 10:32:59 PM you wrote: > Just sign it or encrypt it. Obviously encrypt; signed mail is as open as a postcard. > Remembering that in this country we have to by law provide the > Government with our PGP key should they ask for it. Seriously? I know that the German government - well, those guys and dolls thinking they run this mess - thinks about a law providing exactly that. I didn't know England (you are from GB, aren't you?) had it already implemented. Or the US. Interesting to see that Ben Franklin's dictum about freedom and security has been totally forgotten ... He that would exchange liberty for temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety. (Benjamin Franklin) -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.7 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request Any attempt to define what is science is doomed to failure. (Piet Hut) Current beta is 3.0.2.7 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
