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

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

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 to be terrorists (is
wanting to be a terrorist illegal in your jurisdiction?).  Some of them
may simply be accused of doing these things (or of other activities
which you might find more or less offensive than molestation or
terrorism-wanting).  And perhaps they are accused incorrectly.

It sounds like the innocent accused will still be at risk of conviction
(for violating RIPA if not for their alleged crimes) if they choose to
maintain personal and data privacy in the face of these accusations.

> encrytion is about maintaining personal and data 
> privacy; it's not about having a tool to break the law.

It sounds like the UK has made laws that target users of encryption
whether or not those users have actually broken other laws.  So in that
sense, encryption *is* about having a tool to break the law, at least in
the UK :(

	--dkg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 890 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20090813/4bb0a892/attachment.pgp>