rolling Firefox back to 2.x

[Knapp]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Nik N <niknot at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Tony Arnold
> <tony.arnold at manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> ...In the UK, a law was passed recently
>> which allows law enforcement agencies to ask for encryption keys. You
>> can be locked up for 5 years for refusing to divulge it! And that's in
>> criminal cases; I'm not sure about civil cases.
>
> We know about it, but in this case we don't have a potential for some
> "post-9-11" political and/or criminal action, but a rather straightforward
> civil case (i. e., "its only money..." (tm:)). However, (check with your
> favorite lawyer, either side of the pond) from the point of view of being
> forced by law to divulge the encryption key, the person askey to produce
> the key is in *weaker* position if the conflagration is civil (at best, they
> could be the same). But as I stated before, for that reason and other,
> in this case encryption is not considered a solution.
>
> Further examination of the threat model is not particularly productive;
> I'd be very much obliged if someone with enough knowledge of FF3
> (and, perhaps, FF2) could draw up that list of files, with specific
> reference to what type of user data is kept in which. If there are any
> non-obvious consequences of shreding such files after the end of each
> session, we'd appreciated being made aware of those too.
> (and no, there is no need to consider various add-ons).
>
> TIA, Nik N.
do you care about cookies  ?



-- 
Douglas E Knapp

http://sf-journey-creations.wikispot.org/Front_Page