Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

Joseph Oreste Bruni wrote the following on 8/12/09 10:46 PM: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11556 Not entirely on topic, but for those using GnuPG (or other encryption software), you should always keep abreast of the encryption laws of your country. Protect Your Laptop Data From

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

the dragon wrote: [...] encrytion is about maintaining personal and data privacy; it's not about having a tool to break the law. If the encryption is strong and used correctly (with all the non-technical elements that implies) how would you tell the difference? -Chris signature.asc

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:40 PM, the dragonce...@hotmail.com wrote: encrytion is about maintaining personal and data privacy; it's not about having a tool to break the law. Reminds me of when some in the US was talking of Law Enforcement Access Keys being incorporated into cryptographic

Re: RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

the dragon wrote: And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy - they are child molestors and wanna-be terrorists. If I read the news report at that link, I see the following: The former

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Joseph Oreste Brunijbr...@me.com wrote: [clip] http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11556 Not entirely on topic, but for those using GnuPG (or other encryption software), you should always keep abreast of the encryption laws of your country. [clip] Has everyone

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:40 AM, the dragonce...@hotmail.com wrote: oops, didn't reply all... And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy - they are child molestors and wanna-be

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Mearns wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Joseph Oreste Brunijbr...@me.com wrote: [clip] http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11556 Not entirely on topic, but for those using GnuPG (or other encryption software), you should always keep

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Joseph Oreste Bruni escribió: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11556 Not entirely on topic, but for those using GnuPG (or other encryption software), you should always keep abreast of the encryption laws of your country. Unfortunately,

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

Faramir wrote the following on 8/13/09 3:32 AM: [...] Unfortunately, it is not unusual people forgets the passphrases used to protect files, or secret keys... Best Regards Two people have been successfully prosecuted for *refusing* to provide U.K... Charly

RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

oops, didn't reply all... And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy - they are child molestors and wanna-be terrorists. encrytion is about maintaining personal and data privacy; it's

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 06:59:55AM -0400, Charly Avital wrote: Faramir wrote the following on 8/13/09 3:32 AM: Unfortunately, it is not unusual people forgets the passphrases used to protect files, or secret keys... Two people have been successfully prosecuted for *refusing* to provide

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 08:41:37AM -0500, the dragon wrote: If you're in control of the computer the files reside on, and were in control of it when the files were created and last accessed, the chances that you *don't* know the key for the encryption is so slim as to be nonexistant. So the

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

the dragon wrote: If you're in control of the computer the files reside on, and were in control of it when the files were created and last accessed, the chances that you *don't* know the key for the encryption is so slim as to be nonexistant. Apparently I don't exist, then. I have files

RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

If you're in control of the computer the files reside on, and were in control of it when the files were created and last accessed, the chances that you *don't* know the key for the encryption is so slim as to be nonexistant. peace, clark PSA: Salary Slavery. If you earn a salary, your

RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

So who is on with the plausible deniability project for gpg? I have to admit the thought of not being able to prove my innocence doesn't sound like a good prospect. Innocent until proven guilty just isnt an option anymore

RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

Yes, and I'm sure that the government's (in any country) will word these cases in there own favour and make anyone who uses this technology look like the bad guys Michael Griffiths

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On 08/13/2009 08:40 AM, the dragon wrote: And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy - they are child molestors and wanna-be terrorists. Some of them may molest children and some may want

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

Hi, Reference: From: the dragon ce...@hotmail.com And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy - they are child molestors and wanna-be terrorists. Bollocks, To be charged is not

RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

Yes, conspiracy to commit terrorism, or assisting terrorist organizations are federal felony crimes in the US. PSA: Salary Slavery. If you earn a salary, your employer is renting your services for 40 hours a week, not purchasing your soul. Your time is the only real finite asset that you

RE: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

This is what the uk law has to say on the matter (see below) so I interpret it as this. You may not be guilty but if you don't give them the info they require in the format they require you are then guilty of that law. 3.1 Part III provides a statutory framework that enables public authorities to

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

David SMITH wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 06:59:55AM -0400, Charly Avital wrote: Faramir wrote the following on 8/13/09 3:32 AM: Unfortunately, it is not unusual people forgets the passphrases used to protect files, or secret keys... Two people have been successfully

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Aug 13, 2009, at 9:53 AM, michael GRIFFITHS wrote: So who is on with the plausible deniability project for gpg? I have to admit the thought of not being able to prove my innocence doesn't sound like a good prospect. Innocent until proven guilty just isnt an option anymore While I believe

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:44:44PM +0100, Iain Rae wrote: The RIPA is a particularly nasty piece of legislation in this respect. I've often wondered what the situation would be if you'd set your password to go and F**k yourself and were then required to provide it under the RIP bill.

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Julian H. Stacey wrote: Hi, Reference: From:the dragon ce...@hotmail.com And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy -

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/13/09 09:41, quoth the dragon: If you're in control of the computer the files reside on, and were in control of it when the files were created and last accessed, the chances that you *don't* know the key for the encryption is so slim as to be

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 01:09:34PM -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote: Scuze me? I thought this was the gnupg list! I'm sorta new at this stuff but I'm expecting just a bit more expertise from the people contributing to this conversation. I think the point is that they were done under RIP and you can

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

On 2009-08-13, David SMITH wrote: So the people who come on gnupg-users asking for help because they've forgotten their passphrase or accidentally deleted their ~/.gnupg directory don't exist? I guess that's a new way of replying to them: You don't exist. Not forgetting the possibility of

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Adam Funk wrote: On 2009-08-13, David SMITH wrote: /SNIP**/ Not forgetting the possibility of malicious intentions - trying to frame someone by putting encrypted data onto someone's computer and tipping off the authorities.

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 the dragon escribió: oops, didn't reply all... And if you look at the cases reported, these are not system admins refusing to divulge data, or even regular people trying to protect their privacy - they are child molestors and wanna-be

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 the dragon escribió: If you're in control of the computer the files reside on, and were in control of it when the files were created and last accessed, the chances that you *don't* know the key for the encryption is so slim as to be nonexistant.

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 michael GRIFFITHS escribió: This is what the uk law has to say on the matter (see below) so I interpret it as this. You may not be guilty but if you don't give them the info they require in the format they require you are then guilty of that

Re: Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

One might point out that TrueCrypt offers astounding capabilities for hiding data, which the margin of this note is too small to contain. http://www.truecrypt.org/ http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/?s=plausible-deniability --dan ___ Gnupg-users mailing

Two convicted in U.K. for refusal to decrypt data

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11556 Not entirely on topic, but for those using GnuPG (or other encryption software), you should always keep abreast of the encryption laws of your country. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG