[51545] in Cypherpunks
Re: Whut it sez
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jim bell)
Wed Mar 6 18:08:46 1996
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 1996 13:57:53 -0800
To: "A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security" <PADGETT@hobbes.orl.mmc.com>,
cypherpunks@toad.com
From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
At 09:33 AM 3/6/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security=
wrote:
>
>Note: downloaded from www.vtw.org so cannot guarentee correctness-
>
> "=A72804. Unlawful use of encryption to obstruct justice" =20
> "Whoever willfully endeavors by means of encryption to obstruct, =20
> impede, or prevent the communication of information in furtherance=20
> to a felony which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States,=20
> to an investigative or law enforcement officer shall-..."
>
>Interesting wording - sounds almost like if you impede the *commission* of=
=20
>a felony, you is been had. Keyword would seem to be "willingly".
You need to learn to read more carefully. The word they (according to VTW)=
=20
used was "willfully," not "willingly."
In any case, assuming they either never made the error you noticed, or they=
=20
manage to correct it before the bill becomes law, they will have just=20
outlawed the used of encrypted remailers, because:
1. They use encryption to hide the sender and/or the recipient of a note.
2. Any law-enforcement agency could get a "cooperative", computer-literate=
=20
criminal to upload a message that might, arguably, be part of a larger=20
criminal offense (but really wasn't; the purpose is simply to justify an=20
investigation) . The encrypted remailer is then guilty of violation of this=
=20
section, even if the underlying crime is never completed or even=20
attempted. Remember, you can have a "criminal investigation" without having=
=20
a crime. Or a "crime" can be fabricated at the appropriate time, just like=
=20
they did to those operators of a California BBS, called from Oklahoma by the=
=20
cops, and using a kid to turn the whole fraud into a crime.
> Suspect they meant to say "...obstruct (etc) the investigation of a
felony..."
Probably. This section is their wish-list to Santa Claus. It's easy to=20
make mistakes when you're excited about something. They're hoping you=20
suckers will support the whole bill despite this booby-trap. You're the=20
fish, the rest of the bill is the worm, and this section is the hook.
Will you bite?=20
Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com
Klaatu Burada Nikto
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMT4JOvqHVDBboB2dAQFgDQQAmWrTqEaFUC6eFH79cGLeSHXqrXxXb25H
79I+SHT1chhrDQjHYvlPlpovcv/ShyqJB47w8z9XfGTggGKp+WvFVk10du9iviFF
GZRsNgkjtdEpattuw/tZpmCrWW+aOAtM0Ziw+cYQsGdDlbkdHZueJTuCjDwUndGm
BARsyesyGzA=3D
=3DkEFi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
