<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with pgp</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/pgp</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'pgp' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 15:18:01 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 15:18:01 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Pretty Good Pornography</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/67476/Pretty%2DGood%2DPornography</link>
		<description> A Magistrate Judge in the U.S. District Court in Vermont has ruled that a man allegedly caught with child pornography on his laptop need not reveal his PGP password (yes, authorities shut down the laptop and now can&apos;t get at the alleged porn) pursuant to the Fifth Amendment&apos;s protections against self incrimination. The decision is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.volokh.com/files/Boucher.pdf&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;[PDF]. A decent write-up (from CNET of all places) is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9834495-38.html&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. This appears to be the first decision ever to directly address this issue, and many commentators had thought it would come out differently. The major question is whether revealing one&apos;s PGP key is &quot;testimonial&quot; or not. According to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/getcase/US/487/201.html&quot;&gt;Supreme Court&lt;/a&gt;, giving up fingerprints or blood samples isn&apos;t, nor is standing for a lineup, nor is handing over the key to a safe, but if it&apos;s &lt;b&gt;combination&lt;/b&gt; safe, well maybe that&apos;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/getcase/US/487/201.html#tt1&quot;&gt;different&lt;/a&gt;. Never let it be said that your Fifth Amendment rights are easy.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2007:site.67476</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 15:18:01 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>constitution</category>
		<category>court</category>
		<category>fifthamendment</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>pgp</category>
		<category>rights</category>
		<category>testimony</category>
		<dc:creator>The Bellman</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>But... who are they?</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/25354/But%2Dwho%2Dare%2Dthey</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://invisiblog.com/"&gt;Anonymous weblogging&lt;/a&gt; could be the next big thing for those who want &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/25353&quot;&gt;total anonymity&lt;/a&gt; online.  Using the &lt;a href=&quot;http://mixmaster.sourceforge.net/&quot;&gt;mixmaster&lt;/a&gt; remailer and &lt;a href=&quot;http://gnupg.org/&quot;&gt;GPG&lt;/a&gt; encryption you can have a truly impersonal weblog. (my thoughts inside)  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.25354</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:24:05 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>anonymous</category>
		<category>internet</category>
		<category>maxmaster</category>
		<category>pgp</category>
		<category>weblog</category>
		<category>website</category>
		<dc:creator>j.edwards</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10679/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1234-2001Sep20.html"&gt;Crypto guru getting blamed for his software.&lt;/a&gt; PGP writer Phil Zimmermann&apos;s hate mail goes a little something like this, &quot;Phil -- I hope you can sleep at night with the blood of 5,000 people on your hands.&quot;  If Phil is guilty of anything so is everyone who has ever used their credit card online, including Mr. Hate Mail.   </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10679</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:26:17 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>crypto</category>
		<category>cryptography</category>
		<category>email</category>
		<category>mail</category>
		<category>pgp</category>
		<category>phil</category>
		<category>philzimmermann</category>
		<category>zimmermann</category>
		<dc:creator>skallas</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/6502/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.i.cz/en/onas/tisk4.html"&gt;Vulnerabiity in OpenPGP&lt;/a&gt; You don&apos;t even need to crack the key, just get hold of it, modify a few bytes, and presto, sign away from other persona. The issue here is &lt;strong&gt;signing&lt;/strong&gt;, not encrypting. The implications are evident when you think of internet voting, tax filing, etc., but it is still a victory for open cryptography, where peer review can find serious flaws.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.6502</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2001 10:43:43 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>brokenlinks</category>
		<category>deadlinks</category>
		<category>hacking</category>
		<category>OpenPGP</category>
		<category>PGP</category>
		<category>security</category>
		<dc:creator>pecus</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/6459/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,42506,00.html"&gt;Wincent Colaiuta has seen and reviewed the new Mac OS&lt;/a&gt; but you can&apos;t read the review. He&apos;s encrypted the whole thing using PGP and he&apos;s not releasing the key until the OS is released. He says he&apos;s done this to avoid law suits from Apple. &lt;br&gt;
I say he&apos;s begging for hits.&lt;br&gt;
If he wanted to avoid lawsuits, he could just wait to publish the review...  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.6459</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2001 09:10:55 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>Apple</category>
		<category>encrypted</category>
		<category>encryption</category>
		<category>Mac</category>
		<category>OS</category>
		<category>PGP</category>
		<category>review</category>
		<category>WincentColaiuta</category>
		<category>Wired</category>
		<dc:creator>Jako</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/4290/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0011.html#1"&gt;Why Digital Signatures Are Not Signatures&lt;/a&gt; &quot;When first invented in the 1970s, digital signatures made an amazing promise: better than a handwritten signature -- unforgeable and uncopyable -- on a document. Today, they are a fundamental component of business in cyberspace. And numerous laws, state and now federal, have codified digital signatures into law. These laws are a mistake.&quot; -- Bruce Schneier, November Crypto-Gram  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2000:site.4290</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2000 17:59:06 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>BruceSchneier</category>
		<category>Counterpane</category>
		<category>Crypto-Gram</category>
		<category>cryptology</category>
		<category>DigitalSignatures</category>
		<category>PGP</category>
		<dc:creator>lagado</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


