|
5150
phantom

Registered: 09/01/06
Posts: 5,437
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
|
Re: So, in the UK they can put you in jail if you refuse to decrypt your encrypted files [Re: ivi]
#7563719 - 10/26/07 03:28 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
the UK doesnt have a constitution they also have a CCTV camera for every 15 people, so much for GREAT britain, it is the new world order
-------------------- "the way of the warrior is the resolute acceptance of death" Miyamoto Musashi
|
pokermush
Waterboardingmyself toprotect America!


Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 475
Loc: Utah
Last seen: 15 years, 9 months
|
Re: So, in the UK they can put you in jail if you refuse to decrypt your encrypted files [Re: 5150]
#7598891 - 11/05/07 03:19 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I'm quite certain this wouldn't fly in the US. They can get a warrant and take evidence from you (such as DNA or your computer) but you cannot be compelled to incriminate yourself.
|
Mezcal
Registered: 08/11/05
Posts: 1,980
|
Re: So, in the UK they can put you in jail if you refuse to decrypt your encrypted files [Re: pokermush]
#7600217 - 11/05/07 08:36 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
If you had a key to a safe that contained records of your evil deeds, they could take that key from you by force, legally. If you had papers that detailed your evil deeds and your burned them as you were being placed under arrest, they could charge you with tampering with evidence. I think that the concept of a password is essentially the intersection of these two concepts. You aren't incriminating yourself by giving them access to decrypt a computer file, you're enabling them to fully investigate. If they can't PROVE that you aren't cooperating, then they wouldn't be able to charge you with a crime, which is why having embedded/secret partitions of encrypted files is ideal. One is the 'ringer' that includes data that seems plausible for an encrypted volume... some porn, some financial data, etc.
See http://www.truecrypt.org/hiddenvolume.php for a great implementation.
|
FecalDildo
Fat LadiesBingo.


Registered: 04/25/04
Posts: 9,645
Loc: Ass Flavour Pie Factory.
|
Re: So, in the UK they can put you in jail if you refuse to decrypt your encrypted files [Re: 5150]
#7601301 - 11/06/07 02:24 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
5150 said: the UK doesnt have a constitution they also have a CCTV camera for every 15 people, so much for GREAT britain, it is the new world order
Over three million cameras? I don't think so. Yes they have a lot of cameras which most people have no problem with but they don't have a camera for every fifteen people.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: So, in the UK they can put you in jail if you refuse to decrypt your encrypted files [Re: FecalDildo]
#7601455 - 11/06/07 06:11 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
> Over three million cameras? I don't think so.
Actually, that is the number I have heard quoted many times from various sources.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
pokermush
Waterboardingmyself toprotect America!


Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 475
Loc: Utah
Last seen: 15 years, 9 months
|
Re: So, in the UK they can put you in jail if you refuse to decrypt your encrypted files [Re: Mezcal]
#7602308 - 11/06/07 11:50 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mezcal said: If you had a key to a safe that contained records of your evil deeds, they could take that key from you by force, legally. If you had papers that detailed your evil deeds and your burned them as you were being placed under arrest, they could charge you with tampering with evidence. I think that the concept of a password is essentially the intersection of these two concepts. You aren't incriminating yourself by giving them access to decrypt a computer file, you're enabling them to fully investigate. If they can't PROVE that you aren't cooperating, then they wouldn't be able to charge you with a crime, which is why having embedded/secret partitions of encrypted files is ideal. One is the 'ringer' that includes data that seems plausible for an encrypted volume... some porn, some financial data, etc.
See http://www.truecrypt.org/hiddenvolume.php for a great implementation.
One huge difference: the password is in your brain, and you can't be forced to give information from your brain that may be self-incriminating. If you are at risk of prosecution you don't have to speak, period. This is one of the most fundamental principles in the US legal system. The only way around this is if the government waives its right to prosecute you.
Burning papers really doesn't relate in any way to providing a password -- that's (potentially) destruction of evidence, not simply exercising your right to remain silent.
The example of a locked safe is a good analogy. The investigators could forcefully take the key, but they can't legally compel you to disclose where the key is. If it's a combination safe, they can get a warrant to break into the safe, but they can't compel you to provide the combination.
In civil matters (lawsuits), it's a different story. The judge can find you in contempt and throw you in jail until you disclose information, unless that information might also be used against you in a criminal case.
|
|