🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov2.084229.1@zodiac.rutgers.edu> leichter@zodiac.rutgers.
edu writes:
>Imagine that Richard Nixon, in making his tapes, had access to a DAT 
>recorder with an encryption chip.  Congress subpeonas the tapes; he 
>delivers tapes that sound like white noise.  What are the keys, Mr. Nixon?  
>No, I won't tell you that, Fifth Amendment.
>
>Or imagine that Ollie North's famous deleted mail messages had been 
>encrypted.  Or, to take a recent example, that Caspar Weinberger had used a 
>palmtop to keep his personal diary, and all entries in it were encrypted.

>All these examples are from the political domain, because it's those cases
>that get wide publicity, so all of you know about them.  But there is 
>nothing unique about the political domain.  How far would investigation of 
>the S&L's gone if they had encrypted their records, and had a right to 
>refuse to reveal the keys?

The S&L thing has already been talked to death but as for the others,
Am I the only one to notice that the government tends to exempt itself from
these type laws anyway?  Do you think any proposed law is going to stop
the Commander-in-Chief and the military (Ollie North) from encrypting 
without fear of leaks?

Roger
books@fsunuc.physics.fsu.edu