Ruling on RIPA self-incrimination

[Charles Lindsey]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:10:59 +0100, PeteM <otcbn@callnetuk.com> wrote:

> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/14/ripa_self_incrimination_ruling/
>
> "RIPA ruling closes encryption key loophole ... The Appeal Court judges  
> therefore held that an encryption key – even one that exists only in the  
> mind of a single defendant – does have an independent existence, and the  
> defendants should hand it over."
>
Yes, but I don't think there is anything new here. We went through all  
this at the time that RIPA was going through Parliament, and the latest  
ruling simply confirms what Parliament then decided, in full knowledge of  
that feature.

The only thing new since then is that the penalty in the case of terrorist  
offences has been upped to 5 years. So these guys have to decide whether  
it is in their interest to accept a possible 5-year penalty in order to  
avoid an even longer sentence for terrorism. If they were still convicted  
of terrorism in spite of absence of evidence from their encrypted files,  
then I suspect the two sentence would run concurrently anyway.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131                       
   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5