the bill of rights hasn't been revoked. not yet, anyway.

[thug@phantom.com (Murdering Thug)]

I've been thinking about this a bit, and it seems that the Constitution's
Bill of Rights has all the provisions required to implement and legally
use digital money, secure encryption, and anonymous communication networks.

Specifically, the First, Fourth, and Fifth Ammendments can be used as one's
defense in implementing any of the above.

The First Ammendment can be seen as allowing encryption.  Freedom of
Speech does not preclude the government or anybody for that matter having
to understand what I am saying. I can just as easly say  "blardi blahr oof
aarf bloo arrr foo barr arrh blard foobaaaaah" or "010110101101101011101.."
to anyone I like and be protected by the First Amendment.  Only those
that can decode my speech will understand it, those that can't won't. I am
free to speak to whoever I like (freedom of association / assembly). I am
free to speak anonymously provided I break no law (copyright, slander/libel,
etc.).  Even if I do break a law, the next two paragraphs will show that I
cannot be prosecuted for such a crime very easily.

The Fourth Ammendment protects us from illegal search and siezure.  If the
government can get a warrant, they can search my place and sieze all my
encrypted files. They can intercept my encrypted communications.
They can have them, it won't do them any good.  But it is their duty to
decode it, not mine, and the Fifth Amendment basically says that.. 

The Fifth Ammendment is the tastiest one of all when it comes to
encryption.  By pleading the Fifth, you do not have to decrypt anything
for the prosecution.  The Fifth Ammendment gives you the right not to
testify or provide evidence that would incriminate you.  Providing a
key to decrypt your hard disk would incriminate you, and you don't
have to do it.

In short the 1st & 5th ammendments + Secure Encryption can be used make even
a completely legal search or wiretap warrant against one self worthless. 
Hence, not enough evidence for prosecution, hence no prosecution.  They
can't force you to decrypt any of your communcations or stored files,
because you merely plead the Fifth amendment.  This is assuming one
encrypts everything, and has no accomplices/conspiritors who offer to
testify for the prosecution. Even then, with public key encryption, the
most that people who rat on you can give to the prosecutors are messages
that you sent to them (the rat).  And assuming all messages that you have
sent out are sufficiently vague/obscure as to be non-incriminating, you
are fairly safe there too.  Assuming all messages from you were sent
anonymously to a list, they can't even prove you sent them.
Thus if they cannot force you to decrypt your hard disk, you should be
relatively safe from successful prosecution for whatever, whether it be drug
running or running a anonymous digital money bank / barter house.

I guess now you can see why the government is so scared of encryption.
Widespread use of encryption on the part of the criminal class would
simultaneously obsolete all police, the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and
Department of Justice, or at the very least make their jobs several
thousand orders of magnitude more difficult.  For example, a child
pornography ring that trades anonymously in encrypted .gifs using
truly anonymous remailers would be impossible to take down by just
taking down one member of the ring. Furthermore, it may be impossible
to prosecute even that one member.


Thug