From: futplex@pseudonym.com (Futplex)
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 06:44:09 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Subject: Re: GAK and self-incrimination?
In-Reply-To: <199512102233.AA10816@ideath.goldenbear.com>
Message-ID: <199512110944.EAA14913@opine.cs.umass.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Greg Broiles writes:
> But it seems to me that the real bottom line is that the information which
> is compelled is not incriminating, and the information which is
> incriminating is not compelled. The keys to my crypto might lead to
> incriminating evidence, or they might prove to be useful in a prosecution,
> but they're not in themselves any sort of a signal that a crime has been or
> will be committed.

Written half in jest: Well, the cries from the TLAs of "Why do you want to
use cryptography ?  What do you have to hide ?" notwithstanding....

-Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>