Hi. If I understand correctly, this is off topic here, as much as generic hardware or networking issues or whatever. General cryptology and associated legal issues in this sense (again as I understand you) are not specific to OpenBSD being vendor neutral issues. That said I'm all for this discussion. Not to pre-empt others (disregarding the initial negative responses), I think you should be aware there's a valid and consistent case to be made that this might be one of those cases where you'll get little traction. My advice, if this thread doesn't get the traction you like; go elsewhere. Insert quotes from Ben Franklin et al. ... choose your audience.
Regardless. While there's a lot of commonality between the US and some of the rest of us, we have constitutions of our own (except england of course). Please don't fall into the trap that any of this stuff is transferrable. That's a point of law and it stands. I don't have "freedom of speech", the right to keep and bear arms and so on. FYI, I live in a democracy, not a republic. We're transitive. There's a real world difference. Nevertheless, Aristotle nailed this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modes_of_persuasion Those ideas are somewhat intertwined but you've failed. You've failed on logos - the facts - give some context. Clear context. Why do I or anyone else here care about rights violations? Without that, prima facie this comes off as a rant without relevance ... uname(1) or tread lightly. You've failed on your pathos - my sympathy or empathy - this is why this is definitely in the off topic "decisions to be made" grey area. I don't see a clear connection between LEO and OpenBSD here. See previous ... uname(1) or tread lightly. You've failed to clarify your ethos - I don't believe you. Your constitution is enough authority but I'm not seeing it presented appropriately. I admire your conjunction of munitions and the second. May I use that? In this case though, open sauce, crypto, second, etcetera are an entirely different issue to the fourth amendment question - protection against unreasonable search and seizure. You've muddied the waters and failed to convince on either account. That's the big deal here. The fourth ... "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ..." http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html#4 First? Sure. Publish, done. Matter of course. No infringements. Right? Second? Sure. Sidebar. Again off topic but trivially interesting. Rubber hose cryptanalysis, the browbeating or otherwise of citizens to gain passwords so DHS inter alia, i.e. Border Patrol, can look at your stuff is strictly a fourth amendment issue (obliquely a fifth). That's where you should be thinking. You live in a common law country with a written constitution - not something to be assumed. There's a trodden path. Stand your ground - "no officer ... unless you provide a warrant based on probable cause I won't be giving you my key". Go read the fourth ... The key is standing your ground. Get arrested or worse or combinations of whatever and go from there. To paraphrase a founding father: "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Trees need iron. Blood serves fine. Ask Thomas Jefferson ... Good on you for taking an hour out of your life. Give me something more than a hypothesis of how bad things are happening that might be violations and how people that I care about are affected on the ground ... Get arrested or GTFO ... I'm not Armorican. I read your constitution and your bill of rights and study your law and your country. I've stood up to LEO here. Describe your experience. Light on the hill. Get the fuck up there.
