[nycbug-talk] Encryption=Criminality

[George Georgalis]

On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 11:12:25AM -0400, alex at pilosoft.com wrote:
>On Sat, 28 May 2005, George wrote:
>
>> It was only a matter of time. . .
>> 
>> It's gone from privacy and anonymity tied to civil rights (eg, voting)  
>> to being considered indicative of criminality.
>> 
>> Okay, dot_ike, time to drop the WPA on my network. . .
>> 
>> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/05/encryption_as_e_1.html
>When privacy is criminal, only criminals will have privacy?

As disgusting the nature of the case is, a couple points should be
made. First, encryption software on the defendants computer had no more
relevance to the case than if the crime was committed while walking and
the prosecution said, per search warrant it was determined that the
defendant owned shoes.

Second, that the defendant had encryption software installed on his
computer had little bearing on the outcome of this case/appeal. [The]
"testimony, if taken as true by the district court, could have been
legally sufficient to support the convictions here."

This case is not so much about "encryption is criminal" as it is: when
criminals are convicted, prosecutors will elucidate every means at the
defendant's disposal to commit the crime.

In addition to having encryption software; prior convictions and lack of
surprise, on the occasion of the search warrant, where also determined by
the state appeals court to have, on the part of the district court, been
"simply explaining the reasons behind its credibility determinations."

If this makes you afraid of using encryption software, you as well
should stop touching anything that could be used in a crime.

// George


-- 
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:george at galis.org