On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 at 10:47:16PM +0000, Sean Gibbins wrote:
> Tim wrote:
> > In light of Hugo fourthcoming talk on "Practical Crypto" and the discussion in
> > the past of the RIPA law though some of you might find this interesting
> > especially as it involves the Hampshire Police
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7102180.stm
>
> Interesting indeed. How do you prove that someone knows a pass phrase
> but is withholding the information? I've got a brain like a sieve - I
> even have one pass phrase that I made a note of that doesn't bloody work!
Ditto, I have keys I can't open myself! Basically the law is framed in
a way that you are guilty and you have to prove you are not. In theory
it you could plant an encrypted file on someone and because they claim
to be unable to unencrypt it, they could go to prison.
I understand why they want these powers, it's like forcing you to open
a safe you own with a warrant, but physical world and the computer
world are different and the government/plod's track record of incompetance
does not bode well...
--
Adam Trickett
Overton, HANTS, UK
The test of the goodness of a thing is its fitness for use. If it
fails on this first test, no amount of ornamentation or finish will
make it any better, it will only make it more expensive and foolish.
-- Frank Pick, lecture to the Design and Industries Assoc, 1916
