Colin Rafferty wrote:
Joe Shea (via Declan McCullagh) writes:
Declan, what would you think if the actual keepers of the keys, so to speak, were the courts, such as the Administratoive Office of the US Courts? That would at least seem to reduce a lot of the possible privacy concerns. One has the sense that once they get into the hands of the varius agencies, they'll get back out.
Why do I feel like we are going around and around in circles?
How about we give copies of our house-keys to the courts? We should also send them our old backup tapes, just in case they need them, too.
It doesn't matter who holds the keys, the problems involved are essentially the same. Such powers are always abused. Getting back to the courts, don't tell me you (joe) are intending to give our keys to the same courts who sign wiretap orders on a whim are you? The courts haven't proven themselves any more trust worthy than other branches of government. Furthermore, it is very difficult to take such powers out of the hands of the courts. How will you fight something like this, take it to court?
-- #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)
Hey! it's the RSA export-A-sig. I can recognize it anywhere... -- KORO "In view of the present world situation," said the parlor philosopher, "the best thing that can happen to a man is not to be born at all in the first place. But I doubt that even one man in a hundred thousand is that lucky."