jerome at jeromebaum.com
Tue Mar 22 20:14:20 CET 2011
"Robert J. Hansen" <rjh at sixdemonbag.org> writes:
> However, the fact you had a counterforensic tool, *by itself*, would
> probably not rise to the level of something that would be admissible at
> trial -- the same way that, if I was charged with stabbing someone to
> death, the fact I own a shotgun would be inadmissible. There would need to
> be evidence of it being used unlawfully, like for instance, evidence
Wasn't there that case where the fact that someone (a now convicted
child molester nonetheless, but let's ignore that fact) had some OpenPGP
implementation on their computer was admitted into a US court and
appeals didn't overturn that admission?
Anyway, we're getting off-topic. We've already determined that using a
deniable system might be a bad idea. The thought experiment continues...
PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A
PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 880 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Gnupg-users