Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

forums.truecrypt.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 200 posts

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#111

Post by B_ »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #102
gst wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If they do have probable cause, they get a warrant which gives them the power to do the search temporarily and only for what they think exists. So if you get a warrant to search your hard drive for something, you are compelled to give them the password just like you are compelled to let them into your house if they have a warrant to search for something like drugs or guns or counterfeit plush toys." Does US law requ…

"Does US law require me to open the door of my house to the police if they have a warrant?" Its a good question, you are required to co-operate with the authorities in the lawful execution of their job. The term 'lawful' is, of course, subject to legal interpretation. Police have arrested people for filming them arresting others, typically the scenario is "They ask the person filming to stop while they are doing thei…

Intentionally making your data inaccessible (by encryption or otherwise) without a means of recovering it to attempt to prevent it being used against you in court could be considered destruction of evidence. If convicted of that, expect far more than a few days in jail, depending on how annoyed the judge is with you.

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#112

Post by dedward »

shareme wrote: post #15
Luyt wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The user received a subpoena duces tecum requiring him to type the passwords or pass phrases necessary to produce the encrypted contents of drives seized 6 months earlier. The true crypt user has attempted to comply but he is still being held in contempt." Did he forget his TrueCrypt password?

Its a criminal case.,..which basically means if he judge requests a document that is encrypted on a hd than defendant cannot refuse or they are in contempt

Okay - but what if the argument is literally "I can't - the keyfile is lost"

or

Ignoring the details of this case, what if the court is ordering you to decrypt something that isn't even encrypted? It's just random data? They assume it is. You assume it isn't.

I suppose in this case, the fact that the someone of authority already saw unencrypted contents gives them enough reason to be confident the drive is encrypted and the defendant has the ability to decrypt it.

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#113

Post by gcb »

B_ wrote: post #111
ChuckMcM wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Does US law require me to open the door of my house to the police if they have a warrant?" Its a good question, you are required to co-operate with the authorities in the lawful execution of their job. The term 'lawful' is, of course, subject to legal interpretation. Police have arrested people for filming them arresting others, typically the scenario is "They ask the person filming to stop while they are doing thei…

Intentionally making your data inaccessible (by encryption or otherwise) without a means of recovering it to attempt to prevent it being used against you in court could be considered destruction of evidence. If convicted of that, expect far more than a few days in jail, depending on how annoyed the judge is with you.

Having lost the key for several of my spare drivers in the closet... How can that power abuse you describe be avoided on innocents?

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#114

Post by marshray »

B_ wrote: post #111
ChuckMcM wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Does US law require me to open the door of my house to the police if they have a warrant?" Its a good question, you are required to co-operate with the authorities in the lawful execution of their job. The term 'lawful' is, of course, subject to legal interpretation. Police have arrested people for filming them arresting others, typically the scenario is "They ask the person filming to stop while they are doing thei…

Intentionally making your data inaccessible (by encryption or otherwise) without a means of recovering it to attempt to prevent it being used against you in court could be considered destruction of evidence. If convicted of that, expect far more than a few days in jail, depending on how annoyed the judge is with you.

But it wasn't evidence when you encrypted it, right?

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#116

Post by gcb »

ptomato wrote: post #53
checker wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't there statutes against forced self-incrimination by the court? I am definitely not a lawyer.

I'm not one either, but laws against self-incrimination do not mean you can withhold/destroy evidence.

No one is withhold/destroying evidence in that case. it's there for anyone to see... encrypted.

Can I go to federal prison if the police ask to me translate some paper in foreign language I happen to have in my pocket and i refuse/don't know the language?

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#117

Post by megaman821 »

runningdogx wrote: post #84
ChuckMcM wrote: post #79

First, there isn't enough information to know what it is this person has (or has not) done. Secondly, the fifth amendment of the US Constitution allows you to refuse to provide testimony which you feel may incriminate you. Generally encryption pass phrases do not count as testimony, the legal system treats them as keys. And that would be covered under the fourth amendment which says the government cannot compel to yo…

What if your passphrase to your truecrypt container (let's say it contains, for the purpose of this thought experiment, child pornography) is the true statement: "I am [for this thought experiment] a child pornography collector." Wouldn't it be a violation of the 5th amendment to be compelled to provide that passphrase, because it is an admission against interest and therefore would be admissible if you disclosed it?…

What if you pass phrase was "I have child porn on my hard-drive", then could you plead the fifth?

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#118

Post by AretNCarlsen »

burgerbrain wrote: post #13

This is why you always have TrueCrypt use multiple volumes. This is exactly what plausible deniability is for.

That would be perjury, though. You are now a Lying Guy, not just a Fifth Amendment Guy, and no amendment will be able to save you if they figure out that you gave a hidden volume password and claimed it as the "real" and only password.

I'm not saying plausible deniability is bad, just that it would be better not to rely on technical arms races to protect fundamental rights.

The Passive Aggressive Award will go to the guy who freely gives the real password to the feds when subpoenaed, but claims it is just a hidden volume password.

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#119

Post by AretNCarlsen »

maratd wrote: post #107
wisty wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Questionable" is the key point here. We can't be sure if the defence holds water until it has been thoroughly tested in court. As for shadow volumes, that's a whole other kettle of fish. I'm sure it won't be quite that simple - if your VLC history has a link to /shadow-volume/pirate_movie.avi then they may be able to compel you to decrypt it.

That's not what it would look like. VLC would have a link to D:\pirate_movie.avi but when you decrypt the volume, all it shows is a bunch of text files on D:\ ... because the password provided is a trigger for the software to show a bunch of text files, not your pirated movie collection. Granted, if we were working for the prosecutor we would be able to put 2 and 2 together ... but ... these are the same morons who j…

And if they do put 2 and 2 together, now you have perjured yourself, not just refused to testify. Much worse.

> Just jerk off to normal porn like everybody else, problem solved.

sigh

First they came for those accused of pedophilia, and I said nothing because I wasn't accused of pedophilia.

Re: TrueCrypt User Held in Contempt of Court

#120

Post by marshray »

speckledjim wrote: post #26
jemfinch wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fifth amendment and encryption issues are already worked out. Just like you can be compelled to open a safe, you can be compelled to decrypt a volume. A self-destroying drive would likely get you a conviction for obstructing justice, just like shredding the contents of a safe would.

A safe is obviously a safe. It obviously contains something. Encrypted data isn't so clear cut. It's trivial to make a datastore that has several encryption keys, so that you could give out one key, and it'd "decrypt" to some boring stuff, whilst keeping the real data, and the alternate key, secret. It'd also be trivial to devise a decryption algorithm, and key, which "decrypts" anyones hard drive to reveal illegal i…

It'd also be trivial to devise a decryption algorithm, and key, which "decrypts" anyones hard drive to reveal illegal images even when none are really there...

Well the revealed images could not be significantly larger in size than then the "key material" you supplied plus the most concise description of the algorithm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity

Post reply on HN