Bill rites:

Duress codes need to be designed to minimized the chance of such responses when they are used.

Absolutely but is a third generation problem: First generation: being able to protect the information (encryption) Second Generation: being able to respond to risks (duress) incurred by the first generation solution (duress codes) Third Generation: being able to respond to risks incurred by using the second generation response (using the duress codes). Is nice to plan for each up front but often the succeding generation risks only become apparent after living with the preceeding generation solution for a while. This should not prevent anyone from implementing the first because of what *might* happen in the second. "Doing nothing" is a sound solution only for politicians. Besides the purpose of "duress codes" is not just to provide an avenue for use in case of threat, it is also to deter the threat in the first place by reducing the "win" probability for those who might issue the threat. (previously mentioned a very real consideration for the fifth amendment. will not repeat.) Warmly, Padgett