Hackerspace raided in Sweden • Hacker News Board

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#41

Post by st3fan » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 3:07 PM UTC

Joe_Bananas wrote: post #37

st3fan wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously doubt that those were in the hackspace. Sounds more like a serious case of having the hackspace in the wrong building with the wrong neighbours.

Well, I don't know who had them, but Sydsvenskan (Swedish newspaper) published the list of impounded goods, and there were 6 pipeboms on there.

Yeah, also listed in the police press release. Together with green lasers (not listed as missing from the hackspace), pepperspray and some other questionable stuff ...

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#42

Post by dagw » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 3:07 PM UTC

Joe_Bananas wrote: post #37

st3fan wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously doubt that those were in the hackspace. Sounds more like a serious case of having the hackspace in the wrong building with the wrong neighbours.

Well, I don't know who had them, but Sydsvenskan (Swedish newspaper) published the list of impounded goods, and there were 6 pipeboms on there.

No there where 6 "slangbomber" which is a home made firecracker, not a pipebomb.

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#43

Post by amackera » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 4:12 PM UTC

mmelin wrote: post #27

jordanb wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So then the Police entered the building ostensibly to break up an illegal party, and then decided to confiscate the computers while they were there? That sounds like a fishing expedition to me. I don't know what the law is in Sweden, but in the US there are 4th amendment protections against that sort of thing.

Sweden does not have any such protections. All evidence is admissible in court no matter how it was obtained, legally or illegally. Of course if you can prove that the evidence was obtained illegally you can file charges for that, but the evidence will still be used.

I am shocked. This is an awful policy!

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#44

Post by amackera » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 4:14 PM UTC

st3fan wrote: post #41

Joe_Bananas wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I don't know who had them, but Sydsvenskan (Swedish newspaper) published the list of impounded goods, and there were 6 pipeboms on there.

Yeah, also listed in the police press release. Together with green lasers (not listed as missing from the hackspace), pepperspray and some other questionable stuff ...

Oh no! Not green lasers!

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#45

Post by dagw » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 4:23 PM UTC

amackera wrote: post #43

mmelin wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden does not have any such protections. All evidence is admissible in court no matter how it was obtained, legally or illegally. Of course if you can prove that the evidence was obtained illegally you can file charges for that, but the evidence will still be used.

I am shocked. This is an awful policy!

Most countries have similar laws. The US is fairly unique in its strong laws about inadmissible evidence. The argument for those policies is that it stops people being let go on a technicality due to someone signing the wrong form or whatever.

However just because evidence is admissible doesn't mean it has to be taken into consideration. Often the court will decide that certain evidence won't be taken into consideration due to how it was obtained. This is an entirely separate decision than whether or not it should be admissible.

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#46

Post by dagw » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 4:26 PM UTC

amackera wrote: post #44

st3fan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, also listed in the police press release. Together with green lasers (not listed as missing from the hackspace), pepperspray and some other questionable stuff ...

Oh no! Not green lasers!

The full report makes clear that it wasn't the colour that was the problem as such, but the fact that they where stronger than what is allowed to own without permission.

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#47

Post by fnid » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 5:57 PM UTC

aerique wrote: post #13

fnid wrote: post #9

Why do they have cut away locks to practice lock picking and blank keys and stuff like that? Sounds kind of shady.

At least in the Netherlands it has been common for hackers to be interested in lockpicking. The irregular magazine Hacktic (which spawned the awesome ISP XS4ALL) used to have features and tutorials about lockpicking. I assume it is the same for Sweden. And if you've got a curious mind I cannot imagine why you would not be interested in it!

It's not about being interested in it or not, it's about the appearance. Cops don't know anything about the hacker mind or why they are using them.

Cops aren't hackers. If you're too curious, you can't even be a cop. If I was a cop and I was busting a place doing illegal stuff and I saw lock picking gear laying around everywhere, I would think they are up to no good.

Why everyone here is shocked by thought that cops would think people publicly collaborating to defeat security measures are up to no good is a bit perplexing.

I am not saying they were up to no good. I am saying it is easily believable that they were up to no good. In fact, I would say, cops who did not assume they were up to no good would be remiss in their duties to protect the public, because in most cases, people with that kind of stuff lying around aren't into it for benevolence.

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#48

Post by boredguy8 » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 8:14 PM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #10

wallflower wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Example: 2009 April FBI raid on Core IP Dallas data center http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=546067 > [Core IP CEO] Simpson added that there were 50 businesses without access to email and data due to the raid. "If you run a datacenter, please be aware that in our great country, the FBI can come into your place of business at any time and take whatever they want, with no reason," he wrote. Bruce Sterling foreshadows…

In case of encrypted data, can't the US government legally force one to disclose passwords following a raid? In other words they might raid a company, they find encrypted hard drives so they ask for passwords. Then does revealing passwords fall under "self-incriminating" or not revealing them fall under "obstructing justice"?

The password can be protected. The contents of what's protected by that password is not. So for instance, that you encrypted content with the password "ilikelittlechildren" can be protected. But that said content is thousands of instances of child pornography cannot be protected, and you can be required to (yourself) unencrypt the content even though you don't tell anyone your password.

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#49

Post by RiderOfGiraffes » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 9:12 PM UTC

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #24

jrockway wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter what the police chief thinks the law is. It matters what the courts think.

Yes, but once your computer is siezed, you're screwed. It only takes one link in the chain to think it's a good idea.

Oops, sorry, "seized."

Re: Hackerspace raided in Sweden

#50

Post by jellicle » Mon, Nov 30, 2009, 9:37 PM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #10

wallflower wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Example: 2009 April FBI raid on Core IP Dallas data center http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=546067 > [Core IP CEO] Simpson added that there were 50 businesses without access to email and data due to the raid. "If you run a datacenter, please be aware that in our great country, the FBI can come into your place of business at any time and take whatever they want, with no reason," he wrote. Bruce Sterling foreshadows…

In case of encrypted data, can't the US government legally force one to disclose passwords following a raid? In other words they might raid a company, they find encrypted hard drives so they ask for passwords. Then does revealing passwords fall under "self-incriminating" or not revealing them fall under "obstructing justice"?

The most correct answer in the U.S. is that the question of whether a defendant can be forced to give up his password is still undecided.

In the UK the government settled the question with a law making it a crime to withhold your password:

http://security.homeoffice.gov.uk/ripa/encryption/faqs/

The issue hasn't really come up in Canada. Some authorities have recommended a law similar to the UK's.