Strong encryption (OT)

[Joep L. Blom]

On 25/01/11 16:41, Aart Koelewijn wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:32:18 +0100, Joep L. Blom wrote:
>
>> On 25/01/11 11:11, Colin Law wrote:
>>> On 25 January 2011 04:26, Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au>   wrote:
>>>> On 25/01/2011 10:08, Robert Holtzman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 04:11:51PM -0700, Doug Robinson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anybody have a feel for the problems associated with
>>>>>> distributing software that employs Strong Encryption.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have looked around and there is a number of good things out there
>>>>>> but I wonder if the US Feds are still throwing hissie fits every
>>>>>> time this stuff appears in public?
>>>>>
>>>>> They probably are but since Phil Zimmermann, the creator of PGP, beat
>>>>> them in court I don't think you have too much to worry about. Someone
>>>>> correct me if I'm wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note: I am *not* a lawyer and the above is *not* legal advice.
>>>>
>>>> There was an article recently about a person who was placed in jail
>>>> for contempt of court because he refused to provide the "authorities"
>>>> his encryption key to the data on his computer. I cannot remember in
>>>> which country this occurred whether it was USA, or Australia, or
>>>> Britain :-( . (I *think* that the article was on BBC Online but I am
>>>> not sure.)
>>>
>>> I think it was in the UK, a guy was charged with child pornography and
>>> would not provide the key for an encrypted disk, no prizes for guessing
>>> why.  I believe he was found guilty anyway.
>>>
>>> Colin
>>>
>> Colin,
>> It was in the Netherlands and the apprehended guy was a paedophile who
>> worked in a "Kindergarten" and had misused>  80 children from 1 year to
>> 10. He was part of a large paedophile network and had thousands of
>> really awful paedophylic pictures on his computer but he had it really
>> well encrypted. However, the police has "persuaded" him to give his
>> encryption code.
>> This kind of guys is be removed permanently from society. Joep
>
> Joep, there has been no trial yet, so he is suspected of and not yet
> found guilty. The case seems rather strong though. And as no one may be
> forced to give evidence against himself he may well have the right not to
> give those keys according to dutch law. But like you, I would not like it
> if someone like him would be able to get near my grandchildren.
>
> Aart
>
>
Aart,
You're right as he is only accused and not tried. However, the things I 
wrote are a resume of what has been written a.o. in the papers and 
stated as facts.
Paedophile is if course not a clinical diagnosis as presented in DSM V 
but a lay term for somebody with a sexual preference for children.
But all this is way OT.
Joep