From: wcs@anchor.ho.att.com (bill.stewart@pleasantonca.ncr.com +1-510-484-6204)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 18:35:04 PST
To: grendel@netaxs.com
Subject: Re: Another problem w/Data Havens...
Message-ID: <9501190233.AA07621@anchor.ho.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> 	I could write a procmail recipe and a script in about an hour to
> automatically secret-share-split and redistribute the incoming submission.
> If the authorities attempt to indict you for possessing illegal
> information / kiddie porn / whatnot, they have to prove that you
> interfered with the automatic redistribution process and examined the
> contents of the submission. If you in fact did not look at the submission,
> they would have a difficult time doing so. 

The problem with a procmail script, unlike the ugly on-the-fly
SMTP-like splitting method I proposed, is that the suspicious message
is in your mail system, intact, and if they nail you before
you can dispose of it, they can prove you had it.
(Even though procmail does stuff quickly, sendmail still
accumulates the material before delivering it, doesn't it?)

They still have to prove that there's something illegal or
forfeiture-supporting about the way you possessed the message,
but by then you're hauled into court and your computer is stolen.
The Feds argued in the Steve Jackson Games fiasco that intercepting
unread mail in mailboxes is different than intercepting it in transit,
and while we can hope that will be overturned, it's better not to
be the guinea pig.

If your machine never has more than a few bits of the message,
they can't catch you in possession of the message - they can only
argue that bits of it flowed through your machine, and that's
much harder to build a case on, and given the abuse the judge
gave the Bad Guys in the SJG case, it's probably easy to prevent
them from keeping your machine as evidence, or at least get it back.

Your paranoia may vary....

			Bill