trivia

[David Howe]

"Owen Lewis" <oml@eloka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> The man who danced with a girl who danced with the Prince of Darkness?
close enough - the point here is that you can be 100% in corresponding only
with the innocent - and still end up with a RIPA order on your doorstep.

> Return to the origins of the thread. I've not claimed that using PKC
cannot
> make trouble for one but only that I would try and act in a way that
> minimise that risk. In short, I would not act as you describe.
Hmm. I may not have explained myself well enough there.
A and B are two other individuals - who have picked a email address from an
online archive (and yes, this happens; I got spammed by that Lockdown2000
fool who *admitted* he had harvested my email from the UKcrypto archives)
for use as an emergency cover. You are unlucky enough to be the cover, and
the plod have just found a big stack of correspondence, apparently from and
to you, half of which (the from bit) they can read....

> For the few with whom I communicate in cipher, there is a unique key for
> every correspondent. Thus, if correspondence with one is compromised it
has
> no effect on the remainder. It suits me well to conduct my business this
> way. There is no reason why others should find such a way best suited to
> their needs. That matters not. It suits mine and those of my
correspondents.
That actually makes things worse - you can't point and say "look officer,
this is MY key and everyone knows it" if you have a policy of a separate key
per correspondent. even less chance of a "balance of probabilities" defence