| |||||||||||||
DM-StegDM-StegPosted Dec 3, 2011 3:46 UTC (Sat) by wdaniels (guest, #80192)In reply to: DM-Steg by gmaxwell Parent article: DM-Steg
> It makes coercive interrogation more obviously ineffective as there is no 'fair' way to match the force to the cooperation.
I think this is the main point. The most likely scenario (it seems to me) would be where a court of law attempts to compel the disclosure of an encryption key. I don't see how legally a court could imprison somebody indefinitely merely on unproven suspicion that multiple aspects of some data exist.
(Log in to post comments)
DM-Steg Posted Dec 3, 2011 22:50 UTC (Sat) by GhePeU (subscriber, #56133) [Link] > I don't see how legally a court could imprison somebody indefinitely merely on unproven suspicion that multiple aspects of some data exist.Ha! Tell that to H. Beatty Chadwick.
|
|||||||||||||