Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives • Hacker News Board

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#301

Post by michaelmrose » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:32 AM UTC

throwanem wrote: post #268

michaelmrose wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a strong argument is there peer reviewed support for it?

In pedophilia specifically? I doubt it. But it's not a far inference from dopamine's role in sexual arousal and satisfaction [1], and its role in drug addiction [2]. While it would be a stretch to postulate that the effect of child pornography on those disposed to it exactly matches that of drugs which provoke massive dopamine release on those who take them, the effects of dopamine on sexual behavior in the human mal…

Is it reasonable to suppose that perverts would be more likely to offend or just consume more porn?

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#302

Post by fred_is_fred » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:32 AM UTC

downandout wrote: post #300

I'm curious why he doesn't just claim that he forgot the key. There's no way to prove conclusively that he's lying, and a judge cannot jail someone for disobeying a court order that they have no way of obeying. If he's told them he knows it and just won't give it to them, then this bridge is probably burned, but it's probably his only shot. Absent a ruling from the Supreme Court on this issue, they can and will hold…

Don't doubt that a judge can't or won't hold you indefinitely if they think you are lying. This guy was held for 14 years because the judge was convinced he was hiding assets in a civil case (divorce):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._Beatty_Chadwick

I mention this because there are parallels. In each case the man would say "I don't have the (key|money)" and in each case the judge can effectively sentence them to indefinite jail.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#303

Post by int_19h » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:34 AM UTC

libertymcateer wrote: post #273

externalreality wrote: post #31

Not sure what the man's crime is here. Does he even remember his keys after sixteen months in the slammer? I don't even remember my Gmail password after 16 days of vacation. Basically, like the article says, it like not opening a safe for an inquisitor: you are damned if you do, you are damned if you don't. Encryption is nothing new people, you are just putting your data in a safe. We have a tendency to misconstrue,…

> Not sure what the man's crime is here. He didn't commit a crime. He is being held in jail for contempt of court. This is how the system works. This is no different than if a judge demanded that you turn over any other form of evidence - it should not be so shocking that you can be held in contempt for refusing to obey a court order. It is bad, however, that he is being let to rot indefinitely. That is the problem h…

I would dare say that the really bad part is that there's no way to know for sure if he can even comply with that order. As I understand, he claims that he has forgotten the password. Obviously, it's a convenient excuse, but it's not something utterly improbable. What if he actually did forget the password? Why is the word of the judge alone sufficient to assume otherwise? There seems to be an obvious lack of checks here.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#304

Post by dbg31415 » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:40 AM UTC

dleslie wrote: post #12

personjerry wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mentioned right in the article - Fifth Amendment

Ah, that's what that is. The amendments are not recognizable to me by number alone.

Oversimplified:

1st - We can say whatever the fuck we want. We can religion. We don't have to fight for our right to party.

2nd - We can have guns.

3rd - We don't gotta share our beds with soldiers.

4th - We don't gotta open the door for the cops.

5th - We don't gotta say shit to the cops.

6th - We can have lawyers.

7th - We can have jury trials.

8th - When we fuck up, the punishment for me is the same as it would be for you.

9th - If there isn't an explicit law against it, then we can do it.

10th - If it's not explicitly made a federal issue in the constitution, then it's a state issue.

Reading these... it's hard not to be very proud of how much they got right back in 1791. And pissed off at how much they aren't getting right today.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#305

Post by naasking » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:44 AM UTC

vivekd wrote: post #223

externalreality wrote: post #31

Not sure what the man's crime is here. Does he even remember his keys after sixteen months in the slammer? I don't even remember my Gmail password after 16 days of vacation. Basically, like the article says, it like not opening a safe for an inquisitor: you are damned if you do, you are damned if you don't. Encryption is nothing new people, you are just putting your data in a safe. We have a tendency to misconstrue,…

His crime is disobeying a court order, which is a crime that you can go to jail for. Just like if you had the key to a safe, and the court orders you to open the safe, you would go to jail if you refuse to do so. If he forgot the keys he could have told the court that and the court would evaluate his credibility. *edited changed from key to combination because combination locks are protected by the 5th amendment and…

> His crime is disobeying a court order, which is a crime that you can go to jail for.

Sure, but isn't the question whether he should go to jail indefinitely? If defying a court order is a crime, then perhaps it should have a well defined jail term.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#306

Post by naasking » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:51 AM UTC

libertymcateer wrote: post #273

externalreality wrote: post #31

Not sure what the man's crime is here. Does he even remember his keys after sixteen months in the slammer? I don't even remember my Gmail password after 16 days of vacation. Basically, like the article says, it like not opening a safe for an inquisitor: you are damned if you do, you are damned if you don't. Encryption is nothing new people, you are just putting your data in a safe. We have a tendency to misconstrue,…

> Not sure what the man's crime is here. He didn't commit a crime. He is being held in jail for contempt of court. This is how the system works. This is no different than if a judge demanded that you turn over any other form of evidence - it should not be so shocking that you can be held in contempt for refusing to obey a court order. It is bad, however, that he is being let to rot indefinitely. That is the problem h…

> He didn't commit a crime. He is being held in jail for contempt of court.

The problem is that contempt isn't classified as a crime and so it doesn't have a fixed term. There are moral hazards with having fixed terms like this, but the moral hazards of not having them, like this case, seem worse.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#307

Post by m-j-fox » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 5:55 AM UTC

My idea is to just hand over the password, which is 'asdf'. If the password fails it's because whoever is in possession of the computer has already logged on and changed the password -- no longer my responsibility.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#308

Post by ryan-c » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 6:02 AM UTC

bbcbasic wrote: post #185

ryan-c wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you don't think they would, believing there is another layer of encrypted data that you could decrypt, lock you up until you "comply"?

But if you decrypt that then they can still lock you up pending the third layer password. By induction you are not getting out.

Yes, that's my point.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#309

Post by thescriptkiddie » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 6:09 AM UTC

payne92 wrote: post #131

If he were being forced to divulge the physical coordinates of a hidden thumb drive, it's highly likely he'd get Fifth Amendment protection. But being forced to divulge the virtual coordinates of his hidden data is somehow different...

I like that metaphor. Encrypting data isn't so much like locking it in a safe as it is hiding it somewhere in the key space. The safe metaphor breaks down because you can drill a hole in the safe to see if there is anything inside. But you can't prove that some encrypted data exists any more than you can prove that a particular item is sitting around somewhere on Earth.

Re: Man jailed 16 months, and counting, for refusing to decrypt hard drives

#310

Post by naasking » Mon, Feb 13, 2017, 6:13 AM UTC

throwanem wrote: post #127

2_listerine_pls wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Omg people watching illegal porn is so bad that we should give up our privacy. One day, some one is going to pass a law or do something that you don't like because the government will have unprecedented access and control of information flow. They can stop you seeing or even sharing. And it may be happening already but nobody knows.

I should not like to think anyone mistook me to be arguing in favor of restrictions on cryptography in general, because someone might use it in the commission or furtherance of a crime. But responding to a case where cryptography is (maybe) used to conceal evidence of possession and/or distribution of child pornography, with, and I paraphrase, "why do we care about this kind of nonsense?", does not advance the cause…

> At the very best, it makes one who advances such an argument look like so completely detached a privacy absolutist as to defend even the vilest of crimes

Oh come on, now who's being hyperbolic. Possession of child porn is clearly not the vilest of crimes, as child molestation is obviously much, much worse. And don't pretend like those are remotely the same.