[Fwd: Czech attack to PGP]

[David Hansen]

On 23 Mar 01, at 10:06, Charles Lindsey wrote:

> 1. Plod seizes your computer under a legitimate warrant, thereby
> acquiring your private key.
> 
> 2. He demands that you provide the passphrase under a RIPA notice.

"You may have that when I'm dead, not before." I might also mention 
the Human Rights Act if I was in England.


Numbers 3 - 7 are then irrelevant.

Personally I would have nothing to do with anything that has been 
touched by the police, or indeed any other gang of officials. You 
have no way of knowing what they have done to it, including item 6 
and it is dangerous to think that they are honest.

Now the Home Office, during a period when they were pretending to 
be open and honest, did tell this list that police officers and other 
officials are angels that we should all trust. This was of course 
bollocks and they had no answer when people raised the question of 
the Chinese visit and the activities of the police. The police were 
indeed agents of a repressive state in this context. UKcrypto 1 Home 
Office -1.

I don't suppose the Home Office read this list any more, it has 
served its purpose to them. However, people who believe Home 
Office lies might like to study the Peter Fell judgement yesterday. 
When even someone as smug as a judge (or three) criticisies the 
police one can bet that they really have gone beyond the pale. 
There is also the Matrix Churchill case which people may care to 
ponder on.

No. As has been said before an innocent person has no choice but 
to refuse such outrageous police requests, this is different for 
criminals.


--
 David Hansen | davidh@spidacom.co.uk  | PGP email preferred
 Edinburgh    | CI$ number 100024,3247 | key number F566DA0E
 If I revoke this key, the only circumstance in which I will not be
 prepared to explain my reasons for doing so will be when UK
 government authorities have stipulated that providing such an
 explanation would be unlawful. See RIP Act 2000.