Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?
From: Joe Peschel (jpeschel_at_no.spam.org)
Date: 07/15/05
- Next message: Anna Rikova: "jointly create a random value for corrupted party"
- Previous message: Mike Amling: "Tiers"
- In reply to: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Next in thread: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:49:38 -0000
Crypto@S.M.S wrote in news:11dfe1lkn45ahdb@news.supernews.com:
> By creating keyrings you open the users up
> to prosecution in areas where encryption is banned. It has already
> been shown that in the US, possession of cryptographic keyrings can
> be construed as criminal intent.
>
In what case has the possession of cryptographic keyrings been construed as
criminal intent?
J
-- __________________________________________ http://www.impeach-bush-now.org Joe Peschel D.O.E. SysWorks http://members.aol.com/jpeschel/index.htm __________________________________________
- Next message: Anna Rikova: "jointly create a random value for corrupted party"
- Previous message: Mike Amling: "Tiers"
- In reply to: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Next in thread: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: \: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Reply: Crypto_at_S.M.S: "Re: Should be in crypto for criminals Re: just stupid?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|