From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Mon, 27 May 1996 06:39:34 +0800
To: jimbell@pacifier.com
Subject: Re: Announcing CryptaPix 1.0
Message-ID: <01I54Q9TVIC68Y4ZHR@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	IN%"jimbell@pacifier.com"  "jim bell" 25-MAY-1996 03:29:13.89

>What they ought to do is to "stegofy" this system by binding a picture with 
>a lower-quality, non-suspicious picture which can be brought up with a 
>"duress code." 

	The idea has come up before; I raised it a while back, for instance.
Your simple version has the problem that if the system is known to hide info in
this way, the cops or whoever will just pressure you for the other picture's
code. Really, the only way to get around this is to have a system that allows
an indeterminate (from the perspective of those who don't have all the phrases)
number of pictures/blocks of text/whatever to coexist, thus allowing one to
pull up a subset of them and realistically claim that that's all of them.
While, as Uni has pointed out, a judge can still toss you in jail for contempt
of court, that is preferable to the results for the discovery of some other
information (i.e., that which would get you the death penalty).
	-Allen