Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says • Hacker News Board

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#171

Post by nickff » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #146

tptacek wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is just this: the notion that you have or haven't forgotten your password is something that gets argued in court, just like everything else. Tech people have a bad habit of pretending that the uncertainties that our work generates are the first uncertainties the court system has ever dealt with. But most of criminal law turns in large part --- mens rea --- over a court making decisions about what's in the he…

That is decided during a trial, and the decision is the outcome of the trial. The 6th amendment says "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial", the 7th amendment says "the right of trial by jury shall be preserved", and the 5th amendment says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". I would interpret what is happening as a de-fac…

This is a good point, and someone should appeal this type of punishment without jury trial.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#172

Post by mindslight » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #59

Hondor wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedophilia is a sexuality. Some people are just that way inclined. Don't confuse child abuse with sexuality the way people used to do about gays. That's extremely harmful to actual pedophiles who may have done nothing wrong. It's not even classified as a disease unless it causes problems for the person afflicted with it.

I wouldn't be so quick to claim they're doing nothing wrong. Every year, rhinos in Africa are threatened by poachers in Africa who want their horns for the black market in China. Every person who buys rhino horn in Africa, every person who is in a position to fight the unnecessary consumption of endangered animals and doesn't, is complicit in the destruction of their species. You don't get a pass because you aren't t…

More like 3D printed replicas of rhino horns being illegal, because they're shaped like poached horns.

You've implied that there are perfectly normal people who choose a career in child abuse for the money.

This subject is yet another instance of society's moral panic "war on X", collateral damage be damned. I mean, who cares about the absurdity of persecuting possession of information, those people are fucking revolting!

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#173

Post by tptacek » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #146

tptacek wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is just this: the notion that you have or haven't forgotten your password is something that gets argued in court, just like everything else. Tech people have a bad habit of pretending that the uncertainties that our work generates are the first uncertainties the court system has ever dealt with. But most of criminal law turns in large part --- mens rea --- over a court making decisions about what's in the he…

That is decided during a trial, and the decision is the outcome of the trial. The 6th amendment says "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial", the 7th amendment says "the right of trial by jury shall be preserved", and the 5th amendment says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". I would interpret what is happening as a de-fac…

The good news is: a judge can't hold you in contempt for relying on your Constitutional rights. So either it's going to be Constitutional for the state to demand encryption to be unlocked, or "indefinite" contempt detentions will be overturned by a superior court.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#174

Post by tptacek » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:31 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #171

kbenson wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is decided during a trial, and the decision is the outcome of the trial. The 6th amendment says "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial", the 7th amendment says "the right of trial by jury shall be preserved", and the 5th amendment says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". I would interpret what is happening as a de-fac…

This is a good point, and someone should appeal this type of punishment without jury trial.

This is a very old legal debate. It can be resolved politically by passing statutes limiting the application of contempt rules, but that seems unlikely to happen soon.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#175

Post by vinceguidry » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:36 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #167

vinceguidry wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is of degree and not kind. When you add reality to content it makes it both morally and psychologically worse. In between the real and the completely fake is the very convincing. Snuff films fill this niche. In between snuff films and Gladiator would be your fringe anime. Fake content isolates negative aspects of experience and presents it in a comforting bubble where you don't have to contemplate all…

You are making a psychological argument not a moral one. Actual evidence suggests things like violent video games actually reduce violent crime in society. So, your going to need actually evidence to support that line of thinking and I don't think it exists.

The moral argument only works if there's a real psychological component. You can't consider them in isolation. It wouldn't be morally wrong if it weren't also psychologically harmful.

Can you make an argument that easily accessible kiddie porn is going to reduce child violence? Even if you could, I would hesitate to make even the fake stuff legal unless the science was very conclusive. I'd argue that with kiddie porn, the default should fall on 'no' and not 'yes'.

That said, it's really difficult to draw a line here. Content creators are going to find ways around any laws we pass. That's why we need a moral component, so that we can enforce these things not just legally, but also socially.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#176

Post by coldtea » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #115

virmundi wrote: post #45

The 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.…

That's not what happened here. Read the DOJ's filing. * The accused admitted to knowing the password and refused to provide it, on the auspices of not wanting investigators snooping through his files. Only later did they claim to have "forgotten" it. * Prosecutors entered into evidence multiple factual claims establishing that the accused knew the password; for instance: years of eyewitness testimony demonstrating th…

>That's not what happened here.

No, but that's what can happen if providing a password becomes mandatory.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#177

Post by coldtea » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:41 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #127

danjoc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have logs on my site showing many users who enter their passwords from memory regularly only to forget them months later after not using them. Since the user hasn't been made to recall the password for months, it's plausible that he forgot it. I know I have personally forgotten passwords to accounts after months of disuse. For instance, I had an old yahoo email account for many years. I didn't use it for about six…

My point is just this: the notion that you have or haven't forgotten your password is something that gets argued in court, just like everything else. Tech people have a bad habit of pretending that the uncertainties that our work generates are the first uncertainties the court system has ever dealt with. But most of criminal law turns in large part --- mens rea --- over a court making decisions about what's in the he…

>But most of criminal law turns in large part --- mens rea --- over a court making decisions about what's in the head of the accused!

That doesn't stop all these uncertainties affecting the outcome ("and the prosecution would like to note that the accused didn't provide the password, pretending that he doesn't remember it/know it" can turn jurors against someone, even if its BS).

How many people were accused and convicted with BS technical certainties (but actual scientific uncertainties) like the bogus "hair matching"?

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#178

Post by kbenson » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:41 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #173

kbenson wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is decided during a trial, and the decision is the outcome of the trial. The 6th amendment says "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial", the 7th amendment says "the right of trial by jury shall be preserved", and the 5th amendment says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". I would interpret what is happening as a de-fac…

The good news is: a judge can't hold you in contempt for relying on your Constitutional rights. So either it's going to be Constitutional for the state to demand encryption to be unlocked, or "indefinite" contempt detentions will be overturned by a superior court.

I have no problem with the state punishing someone for failing to provide something that has been deemed lawful to solicit, but failure to comply should result in another trial of some sort (possibly after a set period, so it's not immediate and abused). Based on the bill of rights, I believe you should not be detained indefinitely without a trial for the charges you are being held for, full stop. That the offense happened during a trial, and a judge was present is irrelevant. Otherwise, the charges you are being detained for have not had a trial by peer. Not to mention, you've now been denied a speedy and public trial. You could try to make a case that you've prevented your own speedy and public trial, but until there's been a conviction on whether you need to comply, I don't see how that reasoning is sustainable.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#179

Post by tptacek » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:42 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #177

tptacek wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is just this: the notion that you have or haven't forgotten your password is something that gets argued in court, just like everything else. Tech people have a bad habit of pretending that the uncertainties that our work generates are the first uncertainties the court system has ever dealt with. But most of criminal law turns in large part --- mens rea --- over a court making decisions about what's in the he…

> But most of criminal law turns in large part --- mens rea --- over a court making decisions about what's in the head of the accused! That doesn't stop all these uncertainties affecting the outcome ("and the prosecution would like to note that the accused didn't provide the password, pretending that he doesn't remember it/know it" can turn jurors against someone, even if its BS). How many people were accused and con…

Of course uncertainty affects the outcome. Of course the system makes the wrong decision on occasion. It's a human institution.

Re: Indefinite prison for suspect who won’t decrypt hard drives, US government says

#180

Post by coldtea » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:43 PM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #119

tptacek wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what happened here. Read the DOJ's filing. * The accused admitted to knowing the password and refused to provide it, on the auspices of not wanting investigators snooping through his files. Only later did they claim to have "forgotten" it. * Prosecutors entered into evidence multiple factual claims establishing that the accused knew the password; for instance: years of eyewitness testimony demonstrating th…

Also, he showed his own family child porn, and they have actually found searches for child porn in a VM on the computer. >Whenever you get to an alarming conclusion like "this means forgetting the password to your laptop means life in prison", chances are, you've missed relevant details. Unfortunately responses like the parent comment are predictable on HN. There is the constant narrative that the government is out t…

>There is the constant narrative that the government is out to get us all.

And historically, from Jim Crow laws, to J.E. Hoover and McCarthy, and onwards to Snowden, this is wrong, because?