[45150] in Cypherpunks
Re: GAK and self-incrimination?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Futplex)
Mon Dec 11 04:52:04 1995
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 04:44:24 -0500 (EST)
Reply-To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
In-Reply-To: <199512102233.AA10816@ideath.goldenbear.com> from "Greg Broiles" at Dec 10, 95 02:33:56 pm
From: futplex@pseudonym.com (Futplex)
Greg Broiles writes:
> But it seems to me that the real bottom line is that the information which
> is compelled is not incriminating, and the information which is
> incriminating is not compelled. The keys to my crypto might lead to
> incriminating evidence, or they might prove to be useful in a prosecution,
> but they're not in themselves any sort of a signal that a crime has been or
> will be committed.
Written half in jest: Well, the cries from the TLAs of "Why do you want to
use cryptography ? What do you have to hide ?" notwithstanding....
-Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>
