In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jim
<james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Wed, 16 Aug 2006 07:06:58 GMT
<muzEg.106$vu2.89@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Once upon a midnight dreary, while Mathew P. pondered weak and weary over
> many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore...:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 2006-08-15, [H]omer spake thusly:
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Police decryption powers 'flawed'
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> | The government faces criticism over plans to give police powers to
>>>> | make suspects produce readable copies of encrypted computer
>>>> | evidence.
>>>
>>> Waste of time.
>>>
>>> Those serious about securing data, can just use plausible deniability
>>> techniques, such as steganography or hidden containers to obfuscate
>>> encrypted data, e.g. conceal hidden documents in a pr0n collection, or
>>> obscure classified data in secondary (hidden) containers, within a
>>> primary container holding plausibly subversive (but still legal)
>>> conspiracy theory material.
>>>
>>> I'm all for thwarting the terrorists, but why should everyone else's
>>> privacy be compromised because of a few ragheads? Just don't let them
>>> into the country in the first place; problem solved.
>>>
>>>> | But some peers, academics and cryptographers say the plans are
>>>> | flawed and risk being abused.
>>>
>>> The police abuse their powers? /shock/ That could *never* happen,
>>> could it?
>>>
>>>> | "You do not secure the liberty of our country and value of our
>>>> | democracy..."
>>>
>>> /choke/
>>>
>>
>> "Those who give up liberty for security will have neither liberty
>> nor security"
>> -unknown
>>
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iD8DBQFE4qIslkJ5K/IU2ToRAiZeAJwJc7Xsc3T/FhMaNjkKUAUa+ZUdwwCgm6Ls
>> y3Zhp4XgD273uhoZSk2DNUk=
>> =4Kpo
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>
> Some say Washington
> some say Jefferson
> some say Garfield (the President, not the cat)
> ...
> going by the above it could be attributed to any of 43 people and still be
> wrong.
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to
the Governor, 1755-11-11 -- _The Papers of Benjamin
Franklin_, ed. Leonard W. Labaree, Vol 6. P.242 (1963).
http://www.bartleby.com/73/1056.html
That's probably the best I can do. :-)
There are several forms of this quotation, and others may have picked it
up as well.
http://www.bartleby.com/100/245.1.html
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, _Historical Review of Pennsylvania_
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/1381.html
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, _Historical Review of Pennsylvania_, 1759.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
|
|
