A proper law

[David Hansen]

On 5 Mar 2003 at 17:22, Ian G Batten wrote:

> > If a communication is really that important
> > encryption can be broken by massive computer power.
> 
> Untrue.

I'll let others with more knowledge of the subject argue it out. I 
have yet to see convincing arguments that the sky is falling in. 
Indeed I clearly recall one of the main public proponents of this 
mantra accepting that they had been mistaken.

> And that's before we consider one time pads.

Computers are not very good at generating one time pads. Indeed there 
probably isn't anything good at generating them. Humans get bored and 
repeat things eventually. Perhaps they could be generated by tracking 
the movement of worms (I assume this is random due to the lack of 
brain) or something. Given the volume of communications and the key 
distribution problem I don't see one time pads being used by the sort 
of criminals the Home Office claimed RIP was all about.

Of course we all know that serious criminals and other horsemen are 
not that bothered by laws and so either the Home Office are fools or 
RIP was actually aimed at others but presented as being against 
"serious" criminals.






--
  David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will *always* explain why I revoke a key, unless the UK 
 government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.