[messaging] Value of deniability
jacob at appelbaum.net
Thu Dec 11 09:35:23 PST 2014
On 12/11/14, micah <micah at riseup.net> wrote:
> 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.
I am referencing both cases in Sweden and in Denmark as a recent
example of an OTR chat being cited in court. What you said is correct
- though the specifics aren't really correct. JLT was not found guilty
of anything in the original indictment - he was later found guilty, as
I understand it, of having sent a link to public information to an
> 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.
Could you show me the document that conclusively ties each person to
each of those nyms? My understanding is that this was not concluded in
> 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?
I believe that both stated that there was log tampering. I'm not
completely clear on all of the details as I lack access to the full
transcripts. In any case, they were one juror away from full
acquittal. In Sweden, Anakata was partially acquitted.
All the best,
More information about the Messaging