Standards and PGP wraper

[Norbert Bollow]

David Pick <D.M.Pick at qmw.ac.uk> wrote:

> > Isn't the motivation of signature-only keys served this way?
> 
> In one way, but this isn't where I started. I started by wanting to
> be able (but only if forced by a search warrant) to be able to
> reveal my secret decryption key *without* compromising my
> signature key(s).

I think that it is important to be able to do this even if there 
are no laws which would require you to reveal decryption keys in
certain circumstances.

Suppose you are accused of treason or spionage or something like
that. (Part of the reason for investigations against you may be
that someone noticed that you're using strong crypto stuff and
grew suspicious because of that). Suppose that part of the case
which the persection makes against you relies on the fact that
you have exchanged secret messages... maybe you'd like to be able
to prove that those secret messages have nothing to do with
treason or spionage without compromising your signature key(s)
at the same time?

-- Norbert.