🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1992Nov13.231403.28927@cactus.org> ritter@cactus.org (Terry Ritter) writes:


> In <a_rubin.721673990@dn66> a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
> writes:

>>>    2. As an alternative, I have proposed that each user be
>>>       responsible for providing keys, after the fact, in response
>>>       to a legal warrant.  Failure to do so would be a crime.
>>
>>_I_ think this would violate the Fifth Amendment.

> Possibly.  But does the fact that the government requires radio
> operators to keep logs, and may inspect those logs, also violate
> the Fifth Amendment?

That's a radio licensing argument.  I happen not to agree with it, but
because the government owns/controls radio frequencies, they can specify
regulations on use.

> If the government were to regulate the use of cryptography and
> license users, keeping key logs could well be a condition for
> obtaining (and retaining) a license.

The government does not claim to own/control the phone lines (yet).


>>In addition, as I noted in another message, there is no duty to actively
>>cooperate with a warrant; only to provide the information.

> Does this constrain the argument that courts already have sufficient
> power to compel key disclosure?

Probably.
--
Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything important.