The all writs act is 100% american and 100% constitutional, EVERYBODY SAYS SO
Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
91–100 of 224 posts
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or they want to identify the child victims of sexual abuse, and want to make sure those children are safe, and that the people abusing them and taking photos of that abuse are prosecuted.
Somehow unethical law precedent always seems to come at the aid of women and children. I have a very hard time buying into that overused excuse. How likely do you think it is that the children fall into their jurisdiction? Much less even, do you think they'll be able to identify young undocumented children?
Exactly, unethical laws are always passed on emotions (supposedly to protect the women and children).
Think of how nazi germany started cracking down on jews - some of the very first laws were that german women couldn't work in jewish houses, and Hitler rolled the ball from there.
The new age model is to convict ten innocents than let one guilty suspect go.
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
The person you are replying to wasn't saying that paedophiles who look at child porn aren't doing anything wrong. If he was, your rhino analogy would be a good one, and is the reason nearly everyone agrees that child porn should be illegal even if you are only viewing it. But he was saying that a being attracted to children is in itself not doing anything wrong. Plenty of paedophiles don't look at child porn, do anyt…
> But he was saying that a being attracted to children is in itself not doing anything wrong. > The rhino equivilent would be if you wanted to use rhino horn but because you know it would be wrong to, you never do use it. I would argue that both of these things are wrong, though not as wrong as actually acting on the desires. I don't think there should be any legal consequences for the thoughts in your head, but the…
It's really important to separate what someone thinks from what someone does. Having violent thoughts about people is very common, acting on them far less so.
Someone who reads sick fiction and or looks at man made images is hardly harming anyone. I mean Vorarephilia is also a thing, and they can get off watching monster movies. But, there are very few actual cannibals out there.
At best you could make a comment based on reproductive success in our culture. But, I have trouble going from there to paying to lock people up.
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was going to comment the same thing. If I'd been imprisoned for 7 months, there's a good chance I'd forget my password manager master password too... I remember it now because I enter it multiple times a day. After 7 months, under duress and stress? I'm not sure if I would...
I'm not so sure. It's going to be on your mind constantly, surely.
I forgot my previous master password a month or two after I changed it.
But the point is, after many months (eg 7) plus stress... many people would. Not everyone, but enough people that I don't think you can blanket say "you surely know it, hand it over".
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#95The best part of this whole story is the unintended consequence of attack. Don't like someone, encrypt a zip drive with drivel, toss it in his car and call the cops. Say you saw him looking at what could be kiddie porn. The guy doesn't know the password. Life in prison. No excuse. This applies not merely to Bob in Accounting that's a dick, but to everyone: Congress! Start sniping political enemies. A jump drive here.…
This would work for your average Joe, but not for Congressmen. Unless somebody more powerful than them want them gone, they will have the resources to just deflect the problem. Honestly, how many politicians have you seen going to jail ? Does it match the global % of population in jail ?
it's almost as though congressmen undergo some kind of selection process which attempts to find responsible, non-criminal members of society
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#96The exam showed that Doe accessed or attempted to access more than 20,000 files with file names consistent with obvious child pornography
Is nobody else alarmed that OS X apparently logs any and all( or at least 20k records )file accesses by default? This is way too many to be found in the HFS journal, so it's clearly intentionally logging all accesses.
Edit: They also appear to have been able to deanonymize the defendant's FreeNet usage, though this could have easily been OPSEC violations rather than technical shenanigans.
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sections 49 & 53 of the RIPA allows for up to two years imprisonment for failing to provide unencrypted copies of key material. Not quite the same as life. Although I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to abuse it in this way.
> Although I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to abuse it in this way. Simple. Imprison someone for two years. Demand they provide key material again. Rinse and repeat.
Idk how it works in the UK, but in the US you can't charge someone for the same crime twice.
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#98The best part of this whole story is the unintended consequence of attack. Don't like someone, encrypt a zip drive with drivel, toss it in his car and call the cops. Say you saw him looking at what could be kiddie porn. The guy doesn't know the password. Life in prison. No excuse. This applies not merely to Bob in Accounting that's a dick, but to everyone: Congress! Start sniping political enemies. A jump drive here.…
Or you could just put actual kiddie porn on the planted hard drives and save yourself this entire legal conundrum.
A woman tried that on her ex-husband, got caught, and went to jail. Read the related note here:
http://blogs.harvard.edu/philg/2016/05/14/what-if-youre-in-p...
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Realistically, how can we differentiate between a suspect who's refusing to unlock something, and a suspect who has genuinely forgotten his password? I know for myself, even with passwords I use multiple times a day from memory, it only takes a couple of months of not using them before I cannot recall them again. This guy has been locked up for 7 months. See also the numerous people who stored bitcoin in brain wallet…
> I know for myself, even with passwords I use multiple times a day from memory, it only takes a couple of months of not using them before I cannot recall them again. This guy has been locked up for 7 months. You have the timeline reversed. He's been locked up for 7 months because he refuses to decrypt the drives.
But still - not being able to recall a password NOW is real possibility.
Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't stop the police from keeping him behind bars. "He went through the trouble of encrypting the drive and keeping it clean from prints, but we found it in his car. He's clearly a well organized, determined child porn consumer." Perhaps you have too much faith in law enforcement, or I have grown too cynical by what I perceive as the dawn of a new era of police states.
I am no fan of compelled decryption, and believe it is a violation of 5th amendment rights. That being said, I think the government's argument is stronger than usual having proven that he has accessed files regularly in the encrypted drive by showing logs of regular access to content with suspicious filenames. The police have a fundamentally different argument here than "it happened to be in his possession".
I agree, and looking at the story that is available to us here, the guy in question is very suspect.
However, that does not mean we can or should change the rules (or define new rules) to put him in jail. I'd prefer they use another way to convict this guy. I'm also careful not to condemn a suspect based on what the media reports about him and his case (the court of public opinion is a dangerous thing).
The fifth amendment is one of the few defenses you can call on when facing the incredibly skewed US legal system, and should not be chipped away at, even in a case like this.