From: Martin Minow <minow@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:15:48 +0800
To: Adam Back <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: ATTN: BlackNet, sog's keys 4 sale
In-Reply-To: <v03130307b249d4908a73@[209.66.100.146]>
Message-ID: <v03102816b24a724036ee@[17.219.105.162]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk> notes that the "Toto death thread"
posting was signed using the "son of Gomer" Blacknet key that
was broken by Paul Leyland (read through the past few days of the
archives to get the context).

Adam notes: "Implications?  Others had CJs keys?  Toto is someone
other than CJ?"

One other implication to consider: you might be able to attain
semi-deniability by siging a message with a key that is breakable
by an adversity with govermental resources (to use an euphamism)
but not by an ordinary, presumably less motivated, cracker.

I.e., when "they" arrest you for "speaking truth to kings," your
lawyer claims that, because the signing key was weak, the
government had forged the message and key in order to attack
you for your otherwise legal political views.

Of course, I'm probably just being paranoid.

Martin Minow
minow@pobox.com