[messaging] Value of deniability
micah at riseup.net
Thu Dec 11 09:19:02 PST 2014
Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net> writes:
> A digital signature is binding. A lack of a digital signature on a
> text file certainly leaves room for assertion of tampering and of
> repudiation of the statements contained in the text file. As I
> understand the legal case in Denmark, at least one of the two people
> in Anakata's case declared denied the contents of what appears to be a
> logged OTR conversation. If they had used PGP encrypted/signed mails,
> I think the prosecution would have made a very strong argument about
> PGP signatures.
> Does that count as a reference to case law? I've requested transcripts
> of the trial but after over a month of waiting, I'm not sure when they
> will be delivered.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding which case you are referring to, but as far
as I understood it Anakata, and JLT were both found guilty. Anakata has
been sentenced to 3.5 years in jail. JLT, who has already served 17
months of pre-trial detention, was released.
What I read was that the prosecution managed to present the evidence (a
chat between “Advanced Persistent Terrorist Threat” and “My Evil Twin”,
which were linked to the Anakata and JLT by the prosecution). The judges
and the jurors supported these conclusions and rendered guilty verdicts
as a result.
Was there some other specific part of this case where these chat logs
were brought as evidence by the prosecution, but then were successfully
argued as inadmissible evidence by the defense, with the judges/jury
accepting that argument?
More information about the Messaging