Unfortuantly the way I understand it your supposed to hand over ALL keys and if they suspect you haven't (note: suspect not prove) then go to jail rules apply.
Oh the bit about not telling anyone - what about your lawyer?
A suggestion for secure system etc:-
Use smartcards containing a PKI Certificate and a password / pin/ biometric's etc, implement ACL's using LDAP via ssl using attributes of the certificate and restrict access on that basis.
Forget the idea of a UID having root permissions and make it a part of a normal user's permissions (well normal to anyone who can't see the ACL db).
Make the ACL db fully encrypted and secured, only allow certain authenticated users to modify only the parts they need to. Make it so no single user could fully comprise the system.
One problem with carrying out this form of encryption in the UK is RIP. (Rsomething of Investigatory Powers Act).
Under RIP you can be forced to handover your private keys to the Police if they demand you do so. If you don't go directly to jail - do not pass go - lose all your hardware.
The one problem with this the Police don't need to prove you have illegal content, just suspicison - and the encryption itself can be taken as reasonable grounds.
Just a point on your last line coward -->
"This way, the internet will have mostly high quality sites (assuming the developer is at least competent)."
IF the developer is in the least bit competent and aware of what they're doing then coding for Netscape and IE is not a problem.
Any site that is only visible to IE -- or anyother- browser gets my goat up as the www is NOT and NEVER should be tied to one browser.
what the fuck is your problem?
I think it is nice for once to warned not to install as it is a development release.
Too many people have the habit of just rushing out and installing the latest whatever and totaly screwing up their systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortuantly the way I understand it your supposed to hand over ALL keys and if they suspect you haven't (note: suspect not prove) then go to jail rules apply. Oh the bit about not telling anyone - what about your lawyer?
A suggestion for secure system etc:- Use smartcards containing a PKI Certificate and a password / pin/ biometric's etc, implement ACL's using LDAP via ssl using attributes of the certificate and restrict access on that basis. Forget the idea of a UID having root permissions and make it a part of a normal user's permissions (well normal to anyone who can't see the ACL db). Make the ACL db fully encrypted and secured, only allow certain authenticated users to modify only the parts they need to. Make it so no single user could fully comprise the system.
One problem with carrying out this form of encryption in the UK is RIP. (Rsomething of Investigatory Powers Act). Under RIP you can be forced to handover your private keys to the Police if they demand you do so. If you don't go directly to jail - do not pass go - lose all your hardware. The one problem with this the Police don't need to prove you have illegal content, just suspicison - and the encryption itself can be taken as reasonable grounds.
Just a point on your last line coward --> "This way, the internet will have mostly high quality sites (assuming the developer is at least competent)." IF the developer is in the least bit competent and aware of what they're doing then coding for Netscape and IE is not a problem. Any site that is only visible to IE -- or anyother- browser gets my goat up as the www is NOT and NEVER should be tied to one browser.
what the fuck is your problem? I think it is nice for once to warned not to install as it is a development release. Too many people have the habit of just rushing out and installing the latest whatever and totaly screwing up their systems.