[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: Some legal trouble with TOR in France
- To: <or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Some legal trouble with TOR in France
- From: "Tony" <Tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:05:32 +0100
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivery-date: Sun, 14 May 2006 10:05:42 -0400
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcZ3Xc1vNw6grBmSR3uZlAztfq0VVAAABO8Q
- Thread-topic: Some legal trouble with TOR in France
Not if you destroy keys before you are required to disclose them as I
thought I made clear.
A notice under this section imposing a disclosure requirement in respect
of any protected information-
(a) must be given in writing or (if not in writing) must be given in a
manner that produces a record of its having been given;
(b) must describe the protected information to which the notice
(c) must specify the matters falling within subsection (2)(b)(i) or
(ii) by reference to which the notice is given;
(d) must specify the office, rank or position held by the person
(e) must specify the office, rank or position of the person who for
the purposes of Schedule 2 granted permission for the giving of the
notice or (if the person giving the notice was entitled to give it
without another person's permission) must set out the circumstances in
which that entitlement arose;
(f) must specify the time by which the notice is to be complied with;
(g) must set out the disclosure that is required by the notice and the
form and manner in which it is to be made;
And yes I can already tell if my boot file checksums change. TPM code
integrity checks will just make it easier for Joe Public.
From: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Dave Page
Sent: 14 May 2006 14:51
Subject: Re: Some legal trouble with TOR in France
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 02:45:01PM +0100, Tony wrote:
> Before they realise that they need a key you can microwave the token.
> You can then surrender it when required and still meet your legal
> obligations... 'It must have been static damage officer...you need to
> be more careful with my equipment'
Which in the UK at least could land you in prison for up to 10 years.
> Yes they could get code signed in theory, but it makes it that much
> harder - im sure Microsoft wouldn't be very keen on signing code for
> government organisations to spy on people - imagine the impact on
> their sales if it became public knowledge.
Virtually nil? Let's face it, anybody who really understands TPM won't
be using Vista anyway, and those who don't will just fall for marketing:
"Microsoft are commited to helping the Government fight the War on
Terror and to this end have installed TPM software to protect our users
against terrorists and e-hackers"
I wouldn't be surprised if the US Government at least *mandated*
> Anyway, you can spot any changes in your boot config checksums and be
> immediately alerted to a change.
You can, can you?
Dave Page <grimoire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>