Re: Opiated file systems

["Deranged Mutant" <WlkngOwl@unix.asb.com>]

On 18 Jul 96 at 22:48, Adam Back wrote:
[..]
> The whole system should be designed to withstand scrutiny as to
> whether or not there is a duress file system on any given disk, on the
> assumption that the opponent as full access to the source.
> 
> ie. the attacker can not tell without the hidden file system key (if
> one exists) whether the unused space on your drive is really just
> that: unused space filled with garbage, or whether it is in fact
> another encrytped filesystem.

There has to be a way to tell the system that the sectors are used 
when not the drive isn't mounted and the filesystem isn't active.

> They might be suspicious, but I don't think they would be able to
> claim you were in comptempt of court, if you provide the 1st key and
> claim there is no other key: the software has support for either 1
> or 2 filesystems.

Having a copy of the driver is enough to arouse suspicion.  If they 
don't find anything useful in that one partition, they'll assume 
the second is in use and that you're not giving up the key.  You may 
very well get accused of maintaining a second system even if you are 
not and do not have anything incriminating in the one encrypted fs.

---
No-frills sig.
Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl@unix.asb.com (root@magneto)
        AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com>
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.