Re: First kernel patch (optimization)

[Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>]

Am 21.09.2015 um 17:47 schrieb Austin S Hemmelgarn:
> On 2015-09-20 06:41, Alexander Holler wrote:
>> Am 20.09.2015 um 04:21 schrieb Theodore Ts'o:
>>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 07:47:22PM +0200, Alexander Holler wrote:

>>
>> Again, I don't think that encryption is an alternative. Besides that
>> there is always the thread that strong encrytion will become regulated,
>> there is also the very real thread that someone might end up in jail
>> when using encryption and throwing away the key to delete stuff. E.g.,
>> as to my knowledge, in the UK you might end up in jail if you don't hand
>> out a password. So what happens if you've deleted the key and are really
>> unable to hand it out and the people which have an interest in what
>> you've once stored don't believe you?
> First off, this is why I will never live in the UK.  Secondly, this is

(First, it should, of course, read threat, not thread, my English 
becomes worse when I'm getting angry, besides that I was working on a 
problem with threads just before.)

Just in case of, I have not used the UK as an example because I might 
hate it or similar (nothing of that is the case). I've used the UK as an 
example to make it clear that such can happen in every country (besides 
that I know that some kernel maintainers live there).. And e.g. the US 
has had a time with regulated encryption (and I think there recently was 
another attempt to regulate it again). And besides states, there might 
be other people which might getting some unwanted ideas if they might 
believe that there is something of value for them encrypted somewhere by 
you. So, in my humble opinion, it's always better to get rid of 
something clearly. That also helps against the problem that the 
encryption used today, might be worthless tomorrow.

Regards,

Alexander Holler