Jack Straw' View

[Richard Clayton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <i3hVfrCHdMX5EwCr@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
<roland@linx.net> writes

>In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0006301355580.15539-100000@aidan.ncl.ac.uk>,
>Quentin Campbell <Q.G.Campbell@newcastle.ac.uk> writes
>>I would have thought that the requirement to hand over an encryption key
>>is at least as serious a matter from the point of view of an individual
>
>"Serious" is defined in terms of the sentence for the offence. For the
>GAK of a key to be "serious" I would suggest that it ought to be the
>case that the penalty for *stealing* the key is sufficiently high for
>that particular crime to be defined as "serious".
>
>To be honest, I don't know what the penalty is for stealing a key today;
>or even what statute would apply.
>
>As a matter of crypto policy [on topic for once] what do people think
>the penalty *should* be, and does that penalty come into the "serious"
>category?

The actual definition of "serious crime" in the RIP Bill is to be found
in 79(3), and either (a) or (b) qualifies:

  (a) that the offence or one of the offences that is or would be
      constituted by the conduct is an offence for which a person who
      has attained the age of twenty-one and has no previous convictions
      could reasonably be expected to be sentenced to imprisonment for a
      term of three years or more;
 
  (b) that the conduct involves the use of violence, results in
      substantial financial gain or is conduct by a large number of
      persons in pursuit of a common purpose.

I note the recent comments about low sentences for first-time offenders
in some pedophile cases. Is this then a serious crime ?? 

However (b) is the more interesting definition...  containing as it does
three elements...

I believe it should be parsed as (X OR Y OR Z) although (X AND (Y OR Z))
looks almost possible...  presumably lawyers don't need all the words to
get this sort of combinatorial logic right ?

Anyway - if it is a 3way OR then this means that the Bill believes that
"conduct by a large number of persons in pursuit of a common purpose" is
a serious crime. Makes the London Marathon look pretty criminal ... but
perhaps not the England football or cricket teams since evidence of
common purpose is sometimes hard to detect :)

Anyway, I assume this has been put in so that when these worldwide team
cracking efforts get hold of an encryption key the authorities have an
excuse to steal it for themselves, legally :)

- -- 
richard                       writing to inform and not as company policy
     fewer than 10 MPs still need adopting:  http://www.stand.org.uk/
"Assembly of Japanese bicycle require great peace of mind" quoted in ZAMM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQCVAwUBOV3Y6KlbUjjcq7SFAQF9FAP/fX86z5lBcv61TRpWeKu4hKcJV92l5LOR
z0EjXCL+zD06WkA0PnN/89Jq9jwS66hs51B2Z1XeGKSDUUKMGYXKqwDohJoT2WpX
F4aWXruCUrOp+nfHStH6mwNn8fhmBCX/yU3t9spXl5dhBmXMxH43FncXUpWghUfX
NXqdejjJOnw=
=mtGD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----