It was the author's intention to invoke fear, but no conspiracy theory. When vague and overbroad laws are adopted, they are invariably used in ways they were not intended, and courts routinely approve such use. DOJ could have written a law that enhanced punishment for the intentional use of crypto to conceal the commission of a terrorist act (assuming they defined such). They did not, and this decision was not accidental. It takes no conspiracy theorist to see that this is an attept to expand criminal jurisiction beyond terrorism.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/145/18543#18543