From: tomservo@access.digex.net (Scott Fabbri)
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 06:48:49 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: rhetorical trickery
Message-ID: <v02130500ad68b25e6f1a@[205.252.17.19]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

An entity self-representing as "Vladimir Z. Nuri" writes:

>sure, a government agent could insist, "well, don't be a bonehead.
>it's obviously his diary, and surely contains all his crimes against
>children".

A standard attitude among LEOs is: "if you're not guilty of something, what
are you hiding?" Skilled ones use this lever to get suspects to allow
searches of their property on the flimsiest of pretenses.

>ah yes, just as, obviously, even before trial, "the man is a criminal"

"Innocent until proven guilty" is at best an abstraction to most police.
Given the amount of time they have per case, on average, they're more
interested in slorking up whatever evidence they can against a suspect and
making a bust. Didn't Ed Meese say something along the lines of, "if they
weren't criminals, they wouldn't be involved with the police"?

ObCrypto: Having a fair amount of encrypted stuff around makes any given
piece stand out less. A couple dozen PGP-encrypted files with names like
"1994 1040 Schedule A" and "Business Contact List, 1Q 1995" is a hell of a
lot less suspicious than a single encrypted file called "detonate.pgp." :^)

Furthermore, if they don't believe me and I choose not to give them the
plaintext, isn't that my Fifth Amendment right? Or has that been waived in
cyberspace for our convenience?

Scott
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQB1AwUBMUNUZuvEnOI8TfM9AQEzjwL/RC1kBe/R8aKru9z0PRFI8wwb+/qhMx8d
UFrZ/VA36xDDKY48muwVA+rF+e0tIn3n006DvEBcwMNJ4LfQ15KaVssXjOlDoE0R
mAp8umb/K6uK0bZ9+M4/qZe8e6by0VkW
=CBfe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----