For the IMC folks and the controversy over FBI subpoena of httpd logs.
I was somewhat serious in suggesting that IMC post its logs and encrypt them, forcing any disclosure moves by censoring authorities into the absurd position of going through a legal process in order to gain access to information already available without it.
People who post to IMC should protect themselves and their identities in advance and not depend or force IMC to keep their identities anonymous. The burden of security should fall on those who post, not on the server that puts up those posts. If I were going to put out information that I knew was sensitive, I would make sure it couldn't be traced to me, or alternatively, I would be ready to take the rap for it. The easiest way I can think of for posting, is to go to a printing service bureau or copy center in a big city (different neighborhood) and post from there---paying cash at the desk.
In any case, whether IMC considers it a violation of their right to protect their sources is a different issue. The sources themselves need to free IMC of the obligation to protect them---since IMC will be up to it's own ears in legal bullshit in any case.
Chuck Grimes