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

Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

itworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 70 posts

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#21

Post by oiuhjygtfghjnmk »

citricsquid wrote: post #6
moxiemk1 wrote: post #3

I don't know if a law compelling you to reveal encryption keys to the government/police/courts is valid in the UK. I do, however, know that such a law is morally reprehensible. Quite frankly, it is in the interest of the people to ensure encryption tools are entirely useable by criminals, gangsters, and terrorists, because that ensures they are entirely useable by lawful citizens as well. Unlike guns (something possi…

Let's say I have a hard drive full of illegal material, the police suspect it and have enough evidence to obtain a warrant, should I not then be obligated to show the contents of the hard drive? Much like a warrant for a home or business premises, why should it not be enforceable for digital things too?

Because it's more like the police being given a warrant for you to tell them everything you know.

In most countries the police don't get a search warrant for your head - except where you are wearing an orange jumpsuit and having water poured down your throat.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#22

Post by proexploit »

sp4rki wrote: post #16
gstar wrote: post #5

If Moore's Law keeps working, this is a ticking time bomb for him. If the police stay interested and crack his crypto, he'll do more time for whatever he's concealed on his computer (if anything).

Who knows what he does have in that hard drive. Maybe 4 months in prison is significantly better to what might happen if they do get to his data. Hell 4 months in jail because he refused to give a password sounds a lot better than a sexual offender conviction for 4 years. In any case, if I was him I wouldn't worry about them decrypting the data in my lifetime. Do you know how many millions of years would it take to d…

And yet, I'm surprised by technological advancement every day. If you'd asked me several years ago if I thought we'd have artificial limbs controlled by thoughts, I'd have said it was far far away.

It's a race between the statute of limitations and encryption/computing technology. (I do agree it seems unlikely).

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#23

Post by btilly »

oiuhjygtfghjnmk wrote: post #21
citricsquid wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say I have a hard drive full of illegal material, the police suspect it and have enough evidence to obtain a warrant, should I not then be obligated to show the contents of the hard drive? Much like a warrant for a home or business premises, why should it not be enforceable for digital things too?

Because it's more like the police being given a warrant for you to tell them everything you know. In most countries the police don't get a search warrant for your head - except where you are wearing an orange jumpsuit and having water poured down your throat.

having water poured down your throat.

If you're referring to waterboarding, the water goes in your nose and sinuses, not your throat. And the amount of water used is very small.

The aim is not to drown the person. It is to trigger the drowning reflex. Which happens very fast when you are unable to move.

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58 for a demonstration of how exactly it is done and what it looks like.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#24

Post by oiuhjygtfghjnmk »

btilly wrote: post #23
oiuhjygtfghjnmk wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's more like the police being given a warrant for you to tell them everything you know. In most countries the police don't get a search warrant for your head - except where you are wearing an orange jumpsuit and having water poured down your throat.

having water poured down your throat. If you're referring to waterboarding, the water goes in your nose and sinuses, not your throat. And the amount of water used is very small. The aim is not to drown the person. It is to trigger the drowning reflex. Which happens very fast when you are unable to move. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58 for a demonstration of how exactly it is done and what it looks like…

In that case then my point about the difference between searching your property and searching your mind is totally refuted.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#25

Post by aplusbi »

ax0n wrote: post #10
moxiemk1 wrote: post #3

I don't know if a law compelling you to reveal encryption keys to the government/police/courts is valid in the UK. I do, however, know that such a law is morally reprehensible. Quite frankly, it is in the interest of the people to ensure encryption tools are entirely useable by criminals, gangsters, and terrorists, because that ensures they are entirely useable by lawful citizens as well. Unlike guns (something possi…

It is valid, and it is morally reprehensible. In the US, the Fifth Amendment protects us from such travesties.

Not necessarily. For example, let's say I have a safe, and I've hidden the key. The police get a warrant to search my safe. I am then legally obligated to allow them to search my safe, which means that I am legally obligated to reveal the location of the key.

In the case of the safe, if I refuse they'll just break it open. Strong encryption is not so easily broken so it may not be in my best interest to cooperate (whereas with the safe, it probably is).

Personally I think encryption passwords should be protected by the 5th amendment, but I understand the logic in saying it's not.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#26

Post by smokeyj »

moxiemk1 wrote: post #3

I don't know if a law compelling you to reveal encryption keys to the government/police/courts is valid in the UK. I do, however, know that such a law is morally reprehensible. Quite frankly, it is in the interest of the people to ensure encryption tools are entirely useable by criminals, gangsters, and terrorists, because that ensures they are entirely useable by lawful citizens as well. Unlike guns (something possi…

"It can hide negative things, but it merely provides automation for knowing something you refuse to tell."

Encryption doesn't hide negative things, people hide negative things. Almost like guns don't kill people, people do.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#27

Post by aplusbi »

gst wrote: post #18
citricsquid wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say I have a hard drive full of illegal material, the police suspect it and have enough evidence to obtain a warrant, should I not then be obligated to show the contents of the hard drive? Much like a warrant for a home or business premises, why should it not be enforceable for digital things too?

"Much like a warrant for a home or business premises, why should it not be enforceable for digital things too?" In most (democratic) countries you do not have to cooperate with the police if they have a warrant. So they are allowed to search your house, they are allowed to break your lock/door, but you are not obligated to give them the key to your house. It's already the same with digital things: The police can get…

I'm not so sure that's true. I'm pretty sure that not allowing the police to search your house (given that they have a search warrant) is at the very least considered obstruction of justice (in the US).

The difference is in the consequences of refusal. For a home search, it's usually in your best interest to open the door because it's really easy for the police to break it down. For an encrypted hard drive, it's nearly impossible to retrieve the data if you refuse to decrypt it.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#28

Post by mindslight »

patio11 wrote: post #20
lutorm wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you've written notes in your notebook that are comprehensible only to you, should you be compelled to explain to the authorities what they mean?

This is talking about the Color of Bits, to quote a famous article on the subject of computer programmers discussing law about computers. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/lawpoli/colour/2004061001.php Computer programmers think, aha, I can apply an arbitrary algorithmic translation to input A and get output B, and applying the law to B would be absurd, so therefore applying the law to A is also absurd. What they fail to real…

> You think that encrypted contents of a computer harddrive is a logically equivalent operation to writing things in a form only comprehensible to oneself.

This entirely depends on whether you view your computer as an extension of your personal consciousness or as being an external service that you're interacting with. I'd rather a society where computers act as individuals' agents, rather than people being at the mercy of the computers.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#29

Post by ovi256 »

patio11 wrote: post #20
lutorm wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you've written notes in your notebook that are comprehensible only to you, should you be compelled to explain to the authorities what they mean?

This is talking about the Color of Bits, to quote a famous article on the subject of computer programmers discussing law about computers. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/lawpoli/colour/2004061001.php Computer programmers think, aha, I can apply an arbitrary algorithmic translation to input A and get output B, and applying the law to B would be absurd, so therefore applying the law to A is also absurd. What they fail to real…

This color is what normal people call intention.

Big file that is storing your n-th computed prime : innocuous.

Big file that is storing pirated movie, even if called "n-th prime" : not OK.

Re: Teenager jailed for refusing to hand over computer password

#30

Post by eiji »

This brings up an idea for TrueCrypt.

Why not have two passwords: "foo" and "bar".

If I type in "foo", I get my stuff. If I type in "bar", it may selfdestruct the data, but at least it will show a different content.

So I create a 100GB container, and reserve 10GB as dummy content, maybe 1 mio. copies of the constitution, which will show up with "bar" as password. So I have a password for the police, and everybody is happy.

Post reply on HN