Ian Bell, please pick up the white courtesy phone

[James Coupe]

[Thread moved via cross-post and follow-ups set.]

In message <iH2qEUCs...@xemu.demon.co.uk>, Dave Bird
<da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>Frankly, I found the whole 'signing only' thing a bit of a prima donna exercise.
>>
>>Unless someone can point out the advantage...
>
> The RIP act provides in some cases for seizing plain-text and in
> others decrypt keys. But a key used only for signature cannot
> be seized.

Is this likely to provide a useful way for people to still authenticate
themselves despite any seizure of data? (Signing their encryption key
with the signing key, say.)

(Tangentially: Is it at all possible that courts and police will
interpret warrants as demands for secret keyrings?)

And whilst it occurs, is there any possibility that revoking a key after
lawful warrants etc. are issued (and the key disclosed) could be seen as
informing people of a warrant being issued? (Especially if, say, I had
on my web-site and .sig a comment to the effect that "This key will be
revoked if its security is compromised" or somesuch.)

--
James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D
And if it's all right, I'd kind've like to be your lover EBD690ECD7A1F
'Cause when you're with me I can't help but be B457CA213D7E6
So desperately, uncontrollably happy 68C3695D623D5D