[Gllug] Editors

[David Freeman]

 --- Tom Gilbert <tom at linuxbrit.co.uk> wrote: > * David Freeman
(freemadi at yahoo.co.uk) wrote:
> >  --- Tom Gilbert <tom at linuxbrit.co.uk> wrote: > * William Palfreman
> > (william at palfreman.com) wrote:
> > > > so people can be forced to incriminate themselves (or go to
> jail)
> > > 
> > > I'm sorry, but this is such a bullshit sentence.
> > > 
> > > Either you are forced to reveal you have broken the law (i.e you
> have
> > > indulged in an illegal activity) or you show that you aren't
> hiding
> > > anything illegal.
> > 
> > This is also BS, what happened to the right to remain silent? what
> > about the right outlined in the Human rights act to not incriminate
> > your self?
> 
> The right to remain silent is so that you cannot be cooerced into
> false
> testimony. You cannot be forced to have kiddy porn on your hard drive
> (for example).

I'm sure they could if they wanted to. The point is you have the right
to remain silent, and this infringes on that right, no matter what you
say.

> > > There's nothing wrong (IMO) with criminals being forced to
> > > incriminate
> > > themselves, and by definition innocent people can't incriminate
> > > themselves because they haven't done anything wrong.
> > 
> > Its all about the right to remain silent and innocent till proven
> > guilty!
> >  
> > > It's all very well saying "but the government could frame you",
> but
> > > that's just paranoia and conspiracy theorism.
> > 
> > is it now? what happens if there is a good chance you will nock the
> > government out of office? surely they can use the law enforcement
> > forces to get all your encrypted data, not as far fetched as you
> may
> > thing. Just think back to the 30's in a country not that far away!
> 
> Conspiracy theories. Boring.

No it not boring, if we don't study the past and what went wrong we
can't stop it happening again. This is important and we should all pay
attention! 

> > > I encrypt sensitive mails using gpg, but you can be damn sure I'd
> > > give
> > > up the key if someone suspected me of doing something dodgy - I
> would
> > > _want_ to show I wasn't breaking the law.
> > 
> > ooh, you would provide a good target for the application of
> information
> > theory. If you only encrypt sensitive data it can be seen that the
> > information that is encrypted is of some sensitive nature and
> through
> > coralation of time, destination etc... you can get all sorts of
> info!
> > 
> > Remember, knowledge is information with context. You are providing
> the
> > information in the form of the encrypted email, they are applying
> > context by knowing you are only encrypting certain emails!
> 
> That's correct, they are welcome to. I encrypt emails containing
> password for newly setup accounts, for example - do you think I give
> a
> crap if anyone works that out for themselves? No, I just don't want
> the
> stuff so easily sniffed.

Thus I can tell that you sent an email to foo at bar.com which was
encrypted, thus I can safely assume foo has an account on your box, I
can then speak to them for there password etc...

Its scary stuff, its amazing what you can do with a bit of induction.

Thanks

D

> Tom.
> -- 
>    .^.    .-------------------------------------------------------.
>    /V\    | Tom Gilbert, London, England | http://linuxbrit.co.uk |
>  /(   )\  | Open Source/UNIX consultant  | tom at linuxbrit.co.uk    |
>   ^^-^^   `-------------------------------------------------------'
> 
> -- 
> Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
> http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug 

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug