[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
none
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: none
- From: "Joseph 'Anonymous' Howe" <[email protected]>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:56:12 -0300
- Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.Please report problems or inappropriate use to theremailer administrator at <[email protected]>.
- Sender: [email protected]
Subject: Re: "safe-haven"
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 08:37:46 -0400
[...Initial message & Response...]
Mixmaster wrote:
> What characteristics make a jurisdiction (sovereign power) a good "safe-haven?"
Frederick Burroughs <[email protected]> responded:
Economically? In the view of former ARVN (south-vietnamese army) officer I used to
work with, government stability was a big requirement (anarchists take note).
Stability measured as the system of government, not holders of offices. Of course
it's easy to understand his position in light of his country's recent history.
Despite his foreign attributes, he was the source of some amusement and interesting
tidbits.
Government stability depends on many variables, but history can and is used by
those with holdings as a simple measure.
Then again, a good "safe haven" doesn't necessarily offer the biggest return (or
loss) on your investment.
[...end original...]
(I left the subject in the body of this message as these remailers sometimes clip the
subject field.)
Good comments. History is useful for measuring not only stability, but many facets.
Cases:
1. Anguilla & Cate coming under pressure from Argentina. Would you say that Cate's
customer might have thought that a Carribean island might be a safe haven?
2. Recent law suits over what people say about other people or companies. There doesn't
appear to be much security there for data between the u.s., canada and g.b.
Therefore, where can you find safety from intrusion by your host government, whether
they don't like what is on your server or another government or person doesn't like what
is on your computer? Has anyone tackled this question in a studied way? (Yes, I know that
a number of good law firms would offer me an opinion for $350/hr.)
The only answer I can find, so far (and hence the question), is moving the data, which gets
expensive. It would seem that putting the data in a known safe haven in the first
place would be a better method of protecting it and then move it if assaulted.