full-disclosure - Re: Fwd: HBGary Mirrors?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 23:17:00 +0100
From: Daniël W. Crompton <daniel.crompton@...il.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Fwd: HBGary Mirrors?

On 18 February 2011 20:11, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] <
cal.leeming@...plicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote:

> I'm wondering along the same lines as Thor, based on intent. One of those
> "don't take the piss or the judge is gonna own you" scenarios that would be
> tested in court on a per trial basis. Like, if the files were known to
> contain encrypted info, and if it was proved that you knew the contents of
> those files, then you would be held liable.

Unless you has actually decrypted the file you would not "know" what was in
the file, you would be relying on what the person who gave you the file told
you. I assume this would be some kind of hearsay, although a judge might
consider you an accessory after the fact or a (co-)conspirator which in some
cases might result in a higher sentence than the original crime.

D.

blaze your trail

--
Daniël W. Crompton <daniel.crompton@...il.com>

 <http://specialbrands.net/>

<http://specialbrands.net/>
http://specialbrands.net/
<http://twitter.com/webhat>
<http://www.facebook.com/webhat><http://plancast.com/webhat><http://www.linkedin.com/in/redhat>

Content of type "text/html" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/