From: Michael Handler <grendel@netaxs.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 15:42:33 PST
To: wcs@anchor.ho.att.com
Subject: Re: Another problem w/Data Havens...
In-Reply-To: <9501170829.AA10034@anchor.ho.att.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950117183343.17037A-100000@unix3.netaxs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Tue, 17 Jan 1995 wcs@anchor.ho.att.com wrote:

> The former case is easy,
> if you can rent computer space in a country with a non-meddling
> government and good net access (or an easily rentable government :-).)
> For those of us in the latter situation, the discussion's still
> useful...

	Point taken.

> However, at receipt of the data, it's all in one place, Dave's inbox.
> If Alice encrypted it safely, or secret-shared it herself, great!
> But if Alice is a narc trying to entrap Dave with plaintext ThoughtCrime,
> or Alice's key has been compromised, anything in Dave's inbox is
> still toast, even if anything that's been split and stored is safer
> than if it had been stored unsplit.  So he either needs to split it fast,
> shortening the window, or find a way to blind his mail before processing it,
> or split it before reading it.

	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. 

--
Michael Handler                                         <grendel@netaxs.com>
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics                   Philadelphia, PA
PGP Key ID FC031321  Print: 9B DB 9A B0 1B 0D 56 DA  61 6A 57 AD B2 4C 7B AF
"Toi qui fais au proscrit ce regard calme et haut" -- Baudelaire * Skotoseme