Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!agate!belch.Berkeley.EDU!larry From: larry@belch.Berkeley.EDU (Larry Foard) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: "Bad" backups Message-ID: <1990Nov14.233630.8048@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: 14 Nov 90 23:36:30 GMT References: <36353@nigel.ee.udel.edu> Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator) Organization: University of California Berkeley Lines: 16 In article <36353@nigel.ee.udel.edu> new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) writes: [stuff deleted] > >I've always wondered why intelligent people who run illegal (or >possibly-illegal) BBSs and such don't have a provision for wiping them >on a moment's notice. For example, why not have all local backups >stored in range of a degausser that would turn on if the door to the >room was opened before a particular switch was turned off elsewhere. I >can't imagine this being illegal in any sense. What about storing the >backups in a safe that would take damage to the backups inside to >open? Such safes are available pretty cheaply. > -- Darren I imagine they do, that is probably why the feds love to harrass innocent bystanders, the real criminals are harder to prosecute. When was the last time you heard of a mob boss being prosecuted? Real criminals can afford enough lawyers to find the loopholes.