New UK crypto law and an idea on how to defeat it
Sean Rima <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Wed, 1 Dec 1999 21:03:48 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 01 Dec 1999, David Pick wrote:
> > This is the point. Bob may or may not know both sets of keys. The encry=
> > tool may have used a random plaintext and a random key or it may not. T=
> > only person who knows for sure is Bob. The cops can't prove it either w=
> > assuming that the encryption technique is suitably robust against any
> > analysis they might bring against it.
> > > Bob would not be able to claim that the files were encrypted using
> > > random keys without his knowledge as he would have had to start the
> > > process.
> > Yes but Bob can *lie*. The onus is on the police to prove he is lying. =
> > do they do that given that they don't know whether the second plaintext=
> > random or not?
> Several comments more-or-less at random:
<cut to save bandwidth>=20
I agree with what you say as you say it way better than I could ever try. I
am aware of the various sections of PACE although it has been a number of
years since I have referred to them :)
GPG ID (DSA) 92B9D0CF PGP2 ID 19592A0D Linux User: #124682 ICQ: 679813
To get my PGP Keys send me an empty email with retrieve as the subject
It said "Needs Windows 95 or better". So I installed Linux...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: See Headers for details about obtaining my key
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----