"Tipping-off" revisited

[Q G Campbell]

I noted with interest the signature line of Owen's recent posting
(see below) with its anti-RIPA measure.=20
=20
The list exhaustively canvassed views on the likely effectiveness of
this means of "tipping-off" and avoiding the commission of an offence
under s.54 of RIPA.
=20
I recall at the time that the Home Office offered words of reassurance
on this point. However I have found nothing in the Act itself that
prevents the secrecy provision in a s.49 notice specifically precluding
the revocation of a certificate.

Common sense says that any LEA monitoring Owen's mail will have spotted
the device in his messages and would seek to neutralise it should they
ever serve a s.49 notice on him which they wanted to keep secret.

Have there been any further developments regarding this issue? Has there
been any new statement from the HO about the content and scope of a
"secrecy provision" in a s.49 notice?

  =20
Quentin
--
PHONE: +44 191 222 8209    Computing Service, University of Newcastle
FAX:   +44 191 222 8765    Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, NE1 7RU.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Any opinions expressed above are mine. The University can get its own."
    =20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen Blacker [mailto:owen.blacker@wheel.co.uk]
> Sent: 08 March 2001 10:31
> To: 'ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk'
> Subject: Translation: RE: FRANCE WORRIED BY PERKINS CASE=20
>=20
> [much snipped from here]
>=20
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 7.0
> Comment: Due to RIP, pls check for revocation before using this key!
>=20
> iQA/AwUBOqdfR1VeQSYAA2h0EQKcwwCg7kugVqSQ8muOIX3jHCxQhGbZtzQAoIAK
> EgM52fPGyv7CMPf6/Yj/M7Gs
> =3DCcJl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
=20