[89413] in Cypherpunks
Re: A Legal Strategy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Tue Nov 4 06:24:04 1997
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 97 00:28 GMT+0100
From: ulf@fitug.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
To: cypherpunks@algebra.com
In-Reply-To: <d055dda10a1a6e5d60cbd7a5914bcac6@squirrel>
Reply-To: ulf@fitug.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=)
Monty Cantsin writes:
>Now, you are in an interesting situation. You can't give the
>passwords for half of the disks, but you are unable to prove this.
>This means you have nothing to gain by giving the pass phrase to the
>"Ulysses" disk - you will always be seen as holding out. Even if you
>convince the Judge that some of the disks are noise, you have no
>reason not to include the "Ulysses" disk in this set.
Bryan Olson once discussed something like this in a sci.crypt post:
<URL:http://www.sevenlocks.com/papers/crypto/duress.txt>
