From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
To: “Geoffrey C. Grabow” <gcg@pb.net>
Message Hash: 597777ada31072853a8bf49e5da884bf2c88fdea82724526d206a8c16a756709
Message ID: <3.0b28.32.19961007141327.0074af18@ricochet.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-08 04:31:38 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:31:38 +0800
From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:31:38 +0800
To: "Geoffrey C. Grabow" <gcg@pb.net>
Subject: Re: You can be forced to turn over your encryption keys?
Message-ID: <3.0b28.32.19961007141327.0074af18@ricochet.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 10:33 AM 10/7/96 -0400, Geoffrey C. Grabow wrote:
>I thought we had a 5th amendment. Isn't turning over your key that may (or
>may not) expose encriminating evidence an extension of self-encrimination?
As Tim notes, this has been discussed several times. You might take a look at:
Greg S. Sergienko, Self Incrimination and Cryptographic Keys, 2 RICH. J.L.
& TECH. 1 (1996), <http://www.urich.edu/~jolt/v2i1/sergienko.html>.
--
Greg Broiles | "We pretend to be their friends,
gbroiles@netbox.com | but they fuck with our heads."
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles |
|
Return to October 1996
Return to “Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>”
1996-10-08 (Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:31:38 +0800) - Re: You can be forced to turn over your encryption keys? - Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>