"James M. Cobb" writes:
Thanks for your inquiry. The post "No Privacy Right in UK ?" is closely related to cryptography in at least three ways.
Actually, I was being rhetorical. It was an inappropriate posting.
Cryptography is a means to accomplish an end: privacy.
Thats true, but it isn't a means to keep private investigators from noticing that insurance cheats are perfectly healthy when they claim to be horribly incapacitiated, which was what the article was about.
Farther, the case discussed in the post was a prosaic example of invasion of privacy by deception.
Actually, it was a prosaic example of the lengths to which human stupidity is taken in our court systems. I'm reminded of the rule that says you can't put a boobytrap in your home -- after all, a person breaking and entering could injure themselves with it. It has nothing to do with cryptography, though.
Further, Clinton attended an elite university in the UK. Can you imagine what notions he may have found attractive there?
So what. Nothing to do with cryptography. Take this elsewhere, I say. Perry