Re: URL on a case of encryption used by terrorists

On 07/02/2011 13:17, Mok-Kong Shen wrote:

There is a mention of breaking PGP. Could someone knowledgeable
comment on that?

It says:

The previous government had even looked into whether they should
make it a criminal offense for suspects to not hand over decryption
codes, Lord West said.

The WSJ is ill-informed; the previous government didn't "look into"
this; they *legislated* to make it an offence not to hand over keys when
required to do so by a properly-empowered person. You don't have to be a
suspect; you don't even have to *have* the keys. If you have been
ordered to hand them over, then you commit an offence by not complying,
even if you can't. And it's also an offence to disclose to anyone that
you have received such an order. These offences carry 4-year prison

This is RIPA - the notorious Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
These reporters are asleep on the job.

It also says:

The time needed to break such codes was one reason the previous
British government under Mr. Brown argued for holding terror
suspects for as long as 28 days without charge, Lord West added.

The previous British government under Mr. Brown didn't "argue" for that
time-limit; it legislated it. This was also a notoriously illiberal
piece of legislation, widely discussed; the reporters could have
verified this in half a minute.

Shit, there's two of them; two reporters to report quotes from one
prosecution barrister and one former government adviser, with nobody
else being quoted at all.

Given these inaccuracies, I would't be inclined to believe the claim
that British Intelligence Services decrypted the PGP volumes.

It says:

WSJ Research

I doubt there was any "research" done.