The question is not whether or not you can securely disclose that you are under NSL. The question is whether you can do so without, when the word breaks, being in trouble for leaking that information. So yes, you can establish all sorts of wonderful contraptions that "get the word out", publicly or privately, on or off-shore, so that the people outside can disseminate warnings that you've been compromised. But in the end, the stasi will blame you, and no matter how much cooked-up legal convolution you wrap yourself in, they will nail you to a cross. My view is that engaging in such convolutions serves two counterproductive ends: 1) It makes it seem as if you acknowledge that you should not be disclosing the NSL; a Jury, if you were so lucky and were actually allowed to testify before them in your defence (lol Grand Jury) would be suspicious of your motives. Why all the cloak-and-dagger? It's easy for the prosecution to make you seem shady and suspicious for acting in that way. 2) It delays your disclosure and allows the stasi time and opportunity to preempt and prevent your disclosure entirely. Also, @Grarpamp; you're an optimist, clearly. The US may be exhausting political capital fast, but it has plenty of political capital, and plenty of economic capital to back that up when it fails. In the end, they'll get you unless you're big enough to occupy international attention and get a state-level ally to protect you. The only two people to even partially escape persecution so far are holed up under the protection of state-level adversaries of the US, and even they are still at significant risk. On 31/05/14 03:46, dan@geer.org wrote:
grarpamp writes: | > Thoughts? | | All moot. When someone walks into your office and hands | you a letter you have two choices... operate according to | their whim. Or publish the damn letter with whatever | redactions or lack thereof you feel are appropriate.
Is it really your position that one's choice is to either emulate Mohamed Bouazizi or acquiesce?
I will not do design off the cuff on a mailing list, but I'm certain that a steganographic keep alive is designable. If you (for all values of you) want to continue in the actual direction of design, I'll join with you in that. I have zero free time and I am not a crypto mathematician, but I can offer one tool (or so I think):
http://geer.tinho.net/geer.yung.pdf
wherein Moti and I show that it is possible to encode any arbitrary monotone logic in the structure of split keys.
As always, I assume this list is monitored. Likewise, I assume that any technologic solution is both temporary and second best to the diminishment of government, per se.
--dan
-- T: @onetruecathal, @IndieBBDNA P: +353876363185 W: http://indiebiotech.com