full-disclosure - complaints about the governemnt spying!

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

Date: Thu Dec 29 19:14:19 2005
From: bkfsec at sdf.lonestar.org (bkfsec)
Subject: complaints about the governemnt spying!

Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:04:43 CST, Leif Ericksen said:
>  
>
>>There are those laws that are direct and clear cut, and there are the
>>ones that takes an act of congress to decide what is legal or not.  ;)
>>    
>>
>
>And then there are those you're not allowed to even *see*.  In Gilmore v. Ashcroft,
>the Department of Justice finally consented to allow a *judge* with a security
>clearance to see the text of the law, but Gilmore and his attorneys are still
>denied access to what the law says.
>  
>

Which begs the question... How do you break a law that you don't know 
exists?

How can one be expected not to break the law if the law is never made 
available?

                   -bkfsec