Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!agate!shelby!portia.stanford.edu!baroque.Stanford.EDU!jim From: jim@baroque.Stanford.EDU (James Helman) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Encrypting your data to keep it private Message-ID: Date: 5 Jan 91 08:26:18 GMT References: <1990Dec9.155404.4847@eff.org> <1990Dec11.164524.1860@digibd.com> <5081@trantor.harris-atd.com> <14474@hoptoad.uucp> Sender: news@portia.Stanford.EDU Organization: Stanford University Lines: 15 In-Reply-To: gnu@hoptoad.uucp's message of 2 Jan 91 03:26:39 GMT If in fact the right against self-incrimination does protect an individual from being forced to reveal encryption keys for searches of data, how about physical searches of locked goods? For example, if X has a safe to which only he knows the combination, and without the combination, the safe cannot be opened without destroying the contents. A court issues a search warrant for the contents of the safe. If X refuses to provide the combination citing his right against self-incrimination, does this protect him from being held in contempt of court? Jim Helman Department of Applied Physics Durand 012 Stanford University FAX: (415) 725-3377 (jim@KAOS.stanford.edu) Work: (415) 723-9127