As someone who works in IT, I tend to look a lot at security... There are many (complicated and domestic) methods of hiding your identity. Obviously, the burden of proof resides on the prosecution; in this case it is to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. These statutes don't seem to work in secret courts, and that worries me. Why can't the government, under some kind of legal standard, just oppose the spying of citizens? Now, if I were to work on a client's computer, say a client asks me to back up his data. As an IT professional, my job should technically be bound to the job itself. Say I find something illegal. Should I report, or maintain within the legal boundaries of the contract? A tough question indeed, but I believe the right thing to do is to objectively look at what you are legally allowed to do and act accordingly. This is hard for individuals in and of itself -- for governments and corporations seem to act regardless because they help in the making of laws themselves. This circles back to the rule of law somewhere, but I've had a few drinks and can't seem to think straight anymore -- I'm surprised I've had this good a' grammar so far...