From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 08:41:38 +0800
To: phelix@vallnet.com
Subject: Re: (eternity) mailing list and activity
In-Reply-To: <34b9a145.15127288@128.2.84.191>
Message-ID: <199801140026.AAA00469@server.eternity.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




phelix@vallnet.com writes:
> On 11 Jan 1998 18:48:24 -0600, Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk> wrote:
> [secret splitting eternity data on servers]
> 
> What prevents the operator of such a server from being charged with
> "conspiracy to provide child porn" or whatever?  

I expect so.  I also expect the spooks will be the ones submitting the
child porn to the service.

> If he is holding a portion of such contraband, isn't he as liable as
> if he was holding the whole article(s)?

RICO may make holding a portion worse than the whole thing as it may
then be construed as a conspiracy, RICO allowing asset forfeiture.

Alternatively holding a portion makes it more difficult for the
attacker to determine who the holders are, and to mount a
multi-jurisdictional attack (eg seizing disks in multiple countries).

Not sure how it would work out in practice.

Adam
-- 
Now officially an EAR violation...
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`