I never really understood warrant canaries. Wouldn't they be still vulnerable to rubber-hose cryptanalysis? An attacker could coerce you to continue updating your canary as if nothing had happened.
Assuming US, I think that the gov't can't actually compel speech from an entity e.g. force to keep signing the canary.
Warrant canaries are the way entities can circumvent the narrow case where the gov't actually can restrict your free speech, by creating a case where your lack of speak is telling. By this framework we can then come around again to the first point.
The point of a canary is that it's cryptographically signed, and it's possible to set up a duress passphrase that will delete the key when entered, so if everything works correctly an unauthorized party can't keep posting signed canaries.
In the US you can legally be compelled to keep certain warrants a secret. They can not legally compel you to make a statement, even if the lack of a statement reveals a warrant's existence.
Yes, but usually something like that leaves other signs. If men with guns take away a lot of people in your company in theory other people will notice.
> One singular nuclear warhead can be enough to eradicate the entire population in the US.
How big would this warhead be? "One singular nuclear warhead" wasn't enough to eradicate the entire populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, much less Japan.
But how does raising awareness help anything in this case? In the current political climate, companies are likely more afraid of presidential punishment for not supporting Israel than of any public disapproval for supporting Israel.
> This is easier than it sounds from a military perspective because Israel is small and simple to isolate.
Does that sort of thing even work against nuclear powers? You could certainly isolate them like North Korea, but no country would be willing to invade for fear of seeing a mushroom cloud over their capital.
Fortunately, not even the crazier dictators have opted for nuclear war. Even Putin shied away from it, he understood the political price is preferable to the material price.
Tax havens aren't immune to economic disaster though. If the US dollar becomes worthless, then it doesn't matter how many dollars you have in your offshore bank account. Ditto if you're storing wealth as equities or bonds. Real estate value will collapse if tenants can't pay rent or if the local government decides to confiscate land.
I suppose that you could keep gold or bitcoin wallets in a vault, but then it actually belongs to the vault guards, not to you.
Basically you need a collapse that's bad enough to shrink asset prices but not bad enough to break the social contact.
reply