[Cryptography] Rubber-hose resistance?

[Michael Nelson]

Jon Callas jon at callas.org wrote:

> Many times when someone says "plausible deniability" what they mean is "reasonable doubt."
Don't know what you are objecting to here. A fine point? Accused has plausible deniability, accuser has reasonable doubt. Sounds ok. There is a certain vagueness about what the accuser is doubting, but the listener fills that in. I don't see latter as clearly better than the former.

> The term "rubber hose cryptanalysis" was a term of art decades before XKCD.
Now this is one I've never seen the logic of. The point is just that it's *torture cryptanalysis*. You use a rubber hose if you need plausibl... oops.. *reasonable doubt* that you have tortured someone. But why bring that extra possible component?

Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20171213/c89b389d/attachment.html>