What is a "communication" (was Re: sorry, but ...

Charles Lindsey chl at clerew.man.ac.uk
Wed Aug 8 10:49:11 BST 2012

On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 20:50:36 +0100, Peter Fairbrother  
<zenadsl6186 at zen.co.uk> wrote:

> On 07/08/12 16:39, Charles Lindsey wrote:

>> I would have expected exactly the opposite.
>> If the message is from Alice (known to be in the UK, and easily shown to
>> be such) via Facebook to Bob (who happens to be in the UK) and Others
>> (outside the UK, and probably a bunch of villains) then if "they"
>> intercept the message on its way to Facebook without warrant, they have
>> intercepted a message from Alice to Bob, which is not allowed. End of
>> story AFAICS.
>> If "they" imagine that they are intecepting messages from Alice to the
>> villains, they have neverthelsss intercepted Alice to Bob (because the
>> same message is sent to all of them). They can't pretend they have read
>> the body of the message to the villains but carefully omitted to read
>> the message to Bob, unless they are wearing glasses with some very
>> peculiar filters in them indeed.
>> There is an onus on "them" not to break the law - how they avoid that is
>> their problem but, in this case the technology is definitely against  
>> them.
> RIPA S.5(6): The conduct authorised by an interception warrant shall be  
> taken to include—
> (a) all such conduct (including the interception of communications not  
> identified by the warrant) as it is necessary to undertake in order to  
> do what is expressly authorised or required by the warrant;

Which is irrelevant to the case in question, which was concerned with  
interception *without* a warrant.

Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131                       
   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl at 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

More information about the ukcrypto mailing list