1995-12-08 - Secrets (was:Is there a lawyer in the house?)

Header Data

From: Adam philipp <adam@rosa.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: eb0d2d488234ce3c66d55b417d5b7fce43e06e581a6a6a757a21f772bf1e4bad
Message ID: <9512080843.AA03439@toad.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-08 08:43:08 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 00:43:08 PST

Raw message

From: Adam philipp <adam@rosa.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 00:43:08 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Secrets (was:Is there a lawyer in the house?)
Message-ID: <9512080843.AA03439@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   There seems to be some confusion about what the law of the land considers
a "secret." Secrets according to our laws are knowledge one doesn not share
without a BINDING legal obligation to keep the secret. 
   Remember R4.C? That was a secret until it was shared, and hence lost its
privileged position as a "Trade secret." 
   Your secret key is just as safe, so long as it is always kept out of
anyone else's hands. However if you are going to provide it to someone else
it should be only through some form of contract. Even this might not be
sufficient in some circumstances. The only truly safe possibility would be
giving it to your lawyer in the course of your lawyers representation of
you. NOTE: NOT YOUR COMPANY'S LAWYER. In house council have their obligation
to the company, not to you. As such if they felt your key was unrelated to
company business interests and possibly adverse to the company's
interest...kiss that secret good bye. 
   Sure, the police still need a warrant to go into your house and get the
key, but they do NOT need a warrant to ask anyone else for your key, if you
revealed your secret to someone who does not have an obligation of
confidentiality to you, then they can reveal it with impunity. The danger of
revealing it to a nonlawyer who has a contract with you is that they can be
forced to reveal it, and still be liable to you for breech of contract...

   I am sure you see the dangers...just say no to key escrow...much safer.

   -Adam

[NOTE: I am not an attorney, this is not legal advice, you get what you pay for]

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\
|PGP key available on my home page|Unauthorized interception violates |
|  http://XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX/adam  |federal law (18 USC Section 2700 et|
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|seq.). In any case, PGP encrypted  |
|SUB ROSA...                      |communications are preferred for   | 
|  (see home page for definition) |sensitive materials.               |
\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/






Thread