Checkmate, encyptionfags.
>>54293890
Don't freetards claim closed-source encryption software contain backdoors? Why haven't they cracked the drives then?
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves.
>>54293890
The guy is going to get out because a court order cannot violate the Constitution including 5A's protection from self-incrimination.
>>54293971
>>54293946
And yet he's been jailed for 7 months. Your rights are a joke and unfortunately Europe is going in the same direction fast.
>>54293971
>a court order cannot violate the Constitution including 5A's protection from self-incrimination.
Nigga he's been in prison for seven months already for refusing to self-incriminate, when's the Constitution gonna come in and bail his ass out?
Right after it closes Gitmo?
>>54293946
>>54293971
>guy did a crime
>police are onto him
>compel him to testify
>he goes onto the podium and says he didn't do it
What is the point of that law exactly?
>>54294025
>police think a guy did something
>hey we need your data because we can't get it!
>no
>if you don't help us try to incarcerate you we're going to incarcerate you.
really you can't see how this might be an issue?
>>54294025
Once he's testifying it becomes easy for the prosecutor to royally fuck him in front of the court
>>54294013
>>54294013
>And yet he's been jailed for 7 months.
Which is how long it took to try to change the US district judge's decision to hold him and file for relief with the appellate court? Do you believe that the court systems work quickly in America?
>>54294019
Whoops! The second link was supposed to be for this post. See >>54294072
>>54294072
>Which is how long it took
It's seven months and counting. He's in a cell right now, still under orders to decrypt the drive.
>>54294025
Exactly as it is doing now. Prevents witch hunts and other emotion-driven condemnations that are not based upon provable merits before the court.
>>54294088
>It's seven months and counting.
What's your point? Do you honestly expect the court system to magically change from being an inefficient mess because you are watching the clock?
>>54294104
My point is the guy could die of old age in jail and still be in appeals and would you call that his legal rights being upheld?
>>54293921
Don't freetards claim closed-source encryption software contain backdoors?
No, it's encryption that can't be fully tested and proven.
>>54294111
>My point is the guy could die of old age in jail
>could
You ignore any likelihood of him getting out of jail simply to focus on what is possible? Ever heard of the cherry-picking fallacy?
>>54294111
>My point is the guy could die of old age in jail and still be in appeals and would you call that his legal rights being upheld?
Of course not, no one is saying that this is fair.
The world ain't fair buddy.
>>54294041
this is LITERALLY a case of nothing to hide. if the guy was innocent he would have simply saved himself the trouble.
the cops dont care about pirated movies, if they didnt find cp that evidence would be useless
>>54294115
>No, it's encryption that can't be fully tested and proven.
The fact that they feel like jailing the person until he gives his passwords, shows that they don't have a known backdoor
>>54294133
>this is LITERALLY a case of nothing to hide. if the guy was innocent he would have simply saved himself the trouble.
Or he could be a stickler for the judicial process in the US colloquially known as "innocent until proven guilty." It is not the suspect's obligation to prove his innocence. Then there's also the possibility that his harddrives contain evidence of other possible wrongdoing like tax evasion or fraud.
>>54294163
There are certain cases where you get in trouble for not providing the key. And a case like this is one of them.
There are no charges against him for tax evasion and fraud, the search warrant for that digital device is limited to whatever he is being charged with.
100% no sympathy.
>>54294154
not necessarily, they might have one they want to keep protected, so they take other measures to get him to cooperate.
>>54294204
>There are certain cases where you get in trouble for not providing the key. And a case like this is one of them.
He isn't required to provide ANYTHING, they have no legal reason for holding, since he has never been convicted, and is thus still innocent.
>>54294204
>There are certain cases where you get in trouble for not providing the key.
If the key is not in itself testimonial, such as a finger print lock. But this is not one of those situations. Passcodes and other such keys which are only in the owner's mind is testimonial.
>>54294264
It is obstruction of justice in cases that are clearly defined by digital media such as the digital possession and distribution of cp.
Learn how the real world works instead of shitting up a stupid website dedicated to linux shills and jobless children.
He is guilty, everyone knows it, and cases like this happen because it is his fucking fault. You aren't going to be fucking arrested just because you accidentally viewed a thumbnail from /b/ or something, and even if you did a forensic analysis will show if you clicked/saved the image, and can lots of times show how long you were viewing the image.
>>54294204
>I suspect you have stolen car in your garage, open it up
>Do you have a warrant?
>no
>I wont
>jailed for 7 months.
>>54294317
Not that same thing. Pick up a book.
>>54294325
I don't live in backwards 3rd world country, this is how it works in 1st world countries.
>>54294340
But they have a warrant. They just don't have the key to the garage
>>54294340
>lol america is le 3rd world XD
epic
he has been ordered to unlock the device you fucking dip, just like if you were ordered to open your garage you would comply.
>>54294296
>It is obstruction of justice in cases that are clearly defined by digital media such as the digital possession and distribution of cp.
If they had the evidence to charge, and convict him of this crime, then he would have been proven guilty already.
>He is guilty, everyone knows it
Again, they dont have enough evidence to charge him with anything, they are just going on hearsay
>>54294354
Then he can be arrested for obstructing police work, not for holding child pornography.
>>54294384
What is wrong with your brain? It is DIGITAL FUCKING EVIDENCE the entire point is you are ordered to unlock it for an investigation.
Holy shit the mental gymnastics you are going through deserve a fucking special olympics medal.
>>54294372
You don't have to open the garage fool. If they get a warrant THEY can open the garage. They probably have a warrant for the computer too, but they can't force people to unlock their stuff. Read the fucking bill of rights.
The story is obviously bullshit.
>>54294384
They don't need evidence they have a warrant all the needed was justifiable cause you dumb mongs
>>54294415
Which is why he is in jail
>>54294415
that is literally what is happening here.
>>54294444
>>54294443
How is this BTFOing Encryptionfags then?
Encryption did everything it was supposed to, it stopped police from seeing evidence and this man cannot be convicted as sex offender.
>>54294415
>Then he can be arrested for obstructing police work
Was he arrested for obstructing police work? If I understand this correctly, he is being held in contempt of court for not providing testimony against his own penal interests.
>>54294415
Why didn't he just say he forgot the password?
>>54294472
because he is a fucking idiot.
>>54294415
Yet the article claims he is under arrest for no reason.
If he is obstructing the law, then jail him because of that.
>>54294019
the point of Gitmo is it's not in the US so they can do whatever
>>54294500
yes, the court made shitty decision and is going against US constitution, article is clear on this... I dunno what other faggots are talking about.
>>54294486
>>54294472
He literally did
Or rather, he went in, typed in a password, and when it didn't work he played stupid
>>54293890
Hell get out eventually and win a lawsuit after. They are past the time allotted without charges.
>>54293890
freetard pedos BTFO
good thing I have nothing to hide
>>54294425
>>54294443
>the entire point is you are ordered to unlock it for an investigation.
>They don't need evidence they have a warrant all the needed was justifiable cause you dumb mongs
You are both wrong as per an established case law by the 11th district court of appeals.
The only case someone has not had their fifth amendment right apply to forced decryption is when police already saw evidence that they had in their possession but the pc locked itself later.
In this case the police have not seen the evidence and do not know what is on the device, they only have witness testimony. He will win the appeal.
Source:
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1595245.html
>>54294472
because he's under oath numbnuts
>>54294527
Well, then there is literally no reason to hold him in prison for.
>>54294133
> you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide
America is the 4th Reich
>>54294204
>There are no charges against him for tax evasion and fraud
I should have noted, there doesn't need to be a charge against him at the time they search his harddrive. If they find evidence of other criminal conduct they can charge him with it. You are retarded if you believe the government is under some obligation to cover their eyes to evidence of other criminal actions.
>>54294542
finally someone not spouting shit
but those 7 months are weird man. After he gets out which he will, can he sue somebody for this shit? Maybe the DoJ, don't know how it works
>>54294553
Good luck proving he didn't actually forget the password
>>54294425
>What is wrong with your brain? It is DIGITAL FUCKING EVIDENCE the entire point is you are ordered to unlock it for an investigation.
My brain is working as it should be, yours on the other hand, not so much.
He can't be ordered to potential self convict him self, no matter what the crime is dipshit.
>>54294443
>They don't need evidence they have a warrant all the needed was justifiable cause you dumb mongs
That's not how warrants work ....
>>54294587
>but those 7 months are weird man
Not really. I'm sure his lawyer was doing what lawyers do, filing motions to get his client out. But the court can pretty much hold a person for six months for contempt of court on any reason. After six months the government has to bring charges or else face a habeus corpus writ which is going on now.
>>54294636
his lawyer only turned to a federal appeals court on Tuesday
>>54294654
Which indicates to me that he was trying to work _with_ the district court judge rather than over him until he had no other choice. We try to avoid pissing off a judge, like going over his head, because we never know when we may be in the same court room again in the future.
>>54294623
It works differently when dealing with a case such as the digital possession and distribution of cp.
It's okay kiddo, one of these days you will be forced to enter the real world.
ars technica article with some legal information about the case. It looks good for him
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/child-porn-suspect-jailed-for-7-months-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives/
Question:
No, you can't incriminate yourself in our justice system, but wouldn't the files be considered evidence, and withholding them be obstruction of justice, so long as they have a warrant?
Not siding with the cops, just genuinely curious.
>>54294676
>Law works different in different scenarios
Oh shit nigga, tell me more.
>>54294697
But they don't know if there is evidence. They only suspect it
>>54294697
Not if you don't recall your password
>>54294697
>withholding them be obstruction of justice
It is an obstruction of justice but a constitutionally protected obstruction of justice. A warrant does not override the Constitution.
>>54294697
If cops ask you to open the door and you have lost the keys, is that obstruction of justice?
if you don't have the key and in this case someone said that "he forgot" his key, it's not really his job to find the keys.
>>54293890
They can't prove he knows or remembers the key. Fuck off faggot.
>>54294697
AFAIK all they have is his sister saying he has it and a prosecutor saying it's "her best guess" that he has it. That can't be enough. The SCOTUS has ruled a suspect can't be compelled to unlock a combination lock, maybe they should weigh in on this too to set a precedent
Longer he holds out the better this goes in the favor of freedom advocates anywhere
Not saying he's right or wrong, if he's a pedo then fuck him, but the principle of freedom and justice is what matters here
>>54294727
I mean, isn't that the purpose of a search warrant?
Probable cause > warrant > search > if evidence found we've got a case, if not gtfo my house
>>54294676
>It works differently when dealing with a case such as the digital possession and distribution of cp.
No, it doesnt. Finish high school before you post on here again.
>>54294764
Yes, it does.
>>54294755
the question is should you actively try and help them find evidence when they have a warrant
>>54294553
>no person ever lies under oath
>>54294743
>>54294746
True enough, I suppose
>>54294752
If that's true, surely it's not enough for probable cause.
>>54294788
But if you refuse to let a search warrant be executed and lock your house, they can arrest you
>>54294785
Not legally, I'd accept morally allowable as an answer though
>>54294785
I dont know if this is bait at this point, or that your just fucking retarded.
At the moment hes innocent, and nothing else matters because they have NO evidence to convict him of ANY crime.
>>54294838
>sorry i lost my keys
What now?
>>54294834
You should have used an image of Bill Clinton instead.
>>54294838
I would argue that he's not locking his house and telling them to GTFO, he's saying his keys magically don't work anymore. They're free to try and get in
>>54294785
Due process of the law does not change based upon "a case such as digital possession of and distribution of cp."
>>54294838
>and lock your house
But house was already locked, should you open it and help them with search?
>>54294855
In that case, you can either find a way to let them in, or they kick in your door with your permission.
I suppose that's where it gets a bit murky, since you can't exactly "kick down" encryption
>>54294425
Are you retarded? It is a US law that you can't be ordered to unlock things to incriminate yourself.
Silly Billy, chomos don't have rights.
>>54294834
> guys I totally forgot the password
> lol k you're being jailed forever
> just kidding guis
>The Court held that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination protects a witness from being compelled to disclose the existence of incriminating documents that the Government is unable to describe with reasonable particularity.
I guess it's all in those last 2 magic words
>>54293946
but isn't this a case of subpoena being applied?
>>54294945
subpoenas aren't above the Constitution
>>54294945
Constitution is fundamental right, every other right is build upon constitution not around it.
There is no law that can override constitution.
>>54294938
>disclose the existence of incriminating documents
The government has already specified with reasoanble particularity with the two encrypted harddrives. "Documents" isn't limited to paper and ink forms but include SD cards, phones, and harddrives.
What would have happened if he just told them from the beginning on that he cant remember the password?
That's what i would do
>>54294993
Except for the PATRIOT Act
>>54294372
Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to open your trunk
>>54294996
>"Documents" isn't limited to paper and ink forms but include SD cards, phones, and harddrives.
you're making my point.
>he government has already specified with reasonable particularity with the two encrypted harddrives
that's not describing the documents, that's describing the containers. I have to assume "child porn" is not "reasonable particularity", like if you're accused of tax fraud and they say "tax fraud stuff"
>>54295007
No difference senpai, since they cannot break encryption. They suspect evidence is there so even if you told them "I do not recall".
>>54295034
>you're making my point.
Really now? I point out how harddrives are documents but then in the next line state that they are not documents but containers.
>that's not describing the documents, that's describing the containers.
I'm getting conflicting messages here.
Harddrives are documents. To quote from Black's law dictionary:
>Document - Something tangible on which words, symbols, or makrks are recorded. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a).
>>54295007
If they can show that he accessed the drive recently (either through electronic or mechanical means), then that's an almost sure-fire way of knowing he's lying.
I once read about a technique to make sure you don't even know the password yourself; shuffle fifty $100 notes, then when you set the password to encrypt the drive, you set it as the last two figures of the serial code of each note, giving you a one hundred character long password. As soon as you find yourself remembering the sequence, re-shuffle the notes and generate a new password.
When the police come for you, make sure they actually have to enter your house, and - unfortunately - the notes fall on the floor. You really don't know your password.
The alternative to this is that you say you did this, and that a police officer took the money.
Credit for this method goes to a comment on /.
>>54295073
>Harddrives are documents
well in that case the cops already have the "documents", they just can't "read" them. Too bad.
>>54295073
Hard drives store documents. By that logic I could call a house a document.
>>54295099
>I have changed password and forgot what I changed it to, only remember old one and it doesn't work.
What I get from cases like this and Apple is that the government doesn't want to reveal they can decrypt almost any user-level device with ease. Because I'm sure that's the case. I think it was Snowden who said the NSA could crack an iPhone in several hours?
>>54295105
If you want to argue nuances in the law that is a discussion for another time. But your continued rejection of a simple legal fact that harddrives are considered documents you only demonstrate a closed-minded nature.
>>54295113
it was McAfee actually, who said he can do it in couple of hours.
>>54295141
no I think there was another statement, if it was only McAfee I would have dismissed it immediately
>>54295156
Why? McAfee was right and it was cracked the day that court said no.
>>54293946
>there is an amendment to the constitution that says that you can't be forced to incriminate yourself
>there is no right in the constitution that says they can't just throw you in jail anyway
Shit's fucked, senpai
>>54295166
there it is
http://bgr.com/2016/03/09/apple-fbi-iphone-case-edward-snowden/
also McAfee is an insane junkie, I wouldn't believe him if he said the sky was blue
>>54293890
/thread
>>54295177
>>there is no right in the constitution that says they can't just throw you in jail anyway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus_in_the_United_States
>>54295177
8th Amendment is as close you can get.
Feels good not to live in a police state.
>>54293890
North-americans are fucking stupid!
For fuck's sake!
>>54295240
*americans
>>54295134
Look up what a digital document is and stop trying to force the traditional document definition
>>54295212
>he's totally an enemy combatant
>guis
>it's the war against kiddie porn
>>54295273
>Look up what a digital document is
Shifting the burden of proof? Color me surprised.
Am I to understand from this attempt that you have no citation you can provide and trying to send off anyone who disagrees with you on a wild goose chase?
Let me provide you the direct text of Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a) which was provided exactly because I expected this specific closed-minded idiocy.
>any designated documents or electronically stored information—including writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, sound recordings, images, and other data or data compilations—stored in any medium from which information can be obtained either directly or, if necessary, after translation by the responding party into a reasonably usable form
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_34
Your continued to attempt to distinguish "digital documents" only serves demonstrate your closed-minded nature.
>>54295317
>he's totally an enemy combatant
Straw man? No claim was made about enemy combatants (though even they are entitled to habeus corpus: See Boumedience). It was asserted that there was no right in the constitution that says they cannot throw you (assuming American citizens similar to what is in the OP's article) in jail. This is patently wrong and a citation as provided that explained how it was wrong.
>>54295211
>not having an encryption key that you can't recite from memory with a dead man's switch in place
>>54295364
This idea of a "dead man's switch" is high school kid levels of retarded.
>>54295351
http://definitions.uslegal.com/e/electronic-document/
Here you go you lazy asshole
>>54295384
Dude, he already completely blew your tender asshole clean the fuck out.
>inb4 assmad and samefag accusations
>>54295394
>I didn't bother to read the link
Ftfy
>>54295384
Okay. What is your point?
>Electronic document means “any information in digital form that is conveyed to an agency or third-party
This includes harddrives unless you are somehow trying to argue that harddrives are not "any informatio in digital form."
>>54295417
I'm not the faggot who left you dragging a pink sock behind you, so no, I didn't bother reading the link.
>>54295420
harddrives are information? Sure is news to me. Are briefcases information?
>>54295351
I was just kidding about that, brah. That's why I used misspelled greentext. I guess it went right over your head, sorry.
>>54293946
The general consensus among federal courts is that if the government can make a substantial showing that they already know the contents of the hard drive, then a person can be compelled to provide the password.
>>54295364
Then they'll never stop hitting you
>>54295376
It's practical.
>>54295436
So what's their "substantial showing" in this case? Somebody said he has child porn so it must be true?
>>54295433
>harddrives are information?
Uh. Yes. Harddrives with data written on it are information just like papers with ink written on it are information.
>>54295420
Read the second half of that sentence where they define "DATA"
>>54295458
No, it isn't. Not even a little bit. Which is why it's high school kiddo hacker fantasy bullshit.
The very first thing a forensics lab does with confiscated media is immediately image it. They never, ever touch the original media unless it's absolutely unavoidable. Stupid notions about "dead man's switches" are one of the key reasons for this practice.
>>54295463
That's what makes this case ridiculous. They don't even have enough evidence to charge him. The case is good for everyone though. Hopefully it will give the Supreme Court a chance to settle the forced decryption issue.
>>54295436
[citation needed]
Not directly disagreeing with you but curious as to where you are getting this from.
>>54295471
>which _may_ include data
How is this relevant to the discussion? The definition clearly includes circumstances in which there may not be data (not likely in the situation of a harddrive).
>>54295469
information = data. A hard drive is a data container, not data.
>>54295495
It's very clear it's referring to "information". You just have to read the first 8 words
>>54295495
Give me 15 minutes to get home and find the case.
>>54295519
Thank you for the out of hand rejection of disagreement. Your closed-mindedness is complete.
>>54295480
Sorry, but you're incorrect. A cop immediately fucked up the San Bernadino investigation by messing around with the suspect's phone before forensics could get their hands on it. A wipe key could help you as long as you don't tell the cops to type it in.
>leave wipe key on a note taped to the computer
>cop thinks he's clever and types it in
It's worth a shot. If anyone asks, you put it there to trick burglars.
>>54295545
thank you for bailing when getting told
>>54295534
>"Data," in this context, refers to a delimited set of data elements, each of which consists of a content or value together with an understanding of what the content or value means
They use the term "information" in the first sentence. Then they refuse to use the term information but use a different term "data" so they must have actually meant the same thing rather than explicitly trying to define something else?
I'm sorry but I don't find that argument plausible. It is clear to me that they used different wording for different concepts to distinguish them not conflate them as you suggest.
>>54294025
>accused of $CRIME
>find old harddrive laying around
>"decrypt this drive, anon"
>forgot the password
>jailed forever
>>54295557
No, I'm not incorrect. A case or two of ineptitude from law enforcement who shouldn't have been touching evidence in the first place doesn't make it so.
But let's go with what you said. A stupid fucking cop overstepped his responsibilities and tripped your 31337 "dead man's switch."
Now you're facing obstruction of justice and/or destruction of evidence charges.
>>54295559
"Getting told" by an child who repeats his same assertion while disregarding inconvenient legal facts? You'll excuse me if I don't feel bothered enough to respond any further to "getting told."
>>54295585
Can you not read? Information may include data, text, sounds, codes, computer programs, software, or databases. I did see any use of hardware anywhere in that sentence, did you?
>>54295612
oh you were excused from the start, man. I'm not cruel
>>54295622
>Information may include data
Just because one may involve the other does not mean the two are the same. Elephants may include fleas but fleas may not include elephants.
>>54295645
Your either trolling or an idiot. I've proven my point.
>>54295667
he's a very poor troll. I've seen better bait in neo-/b/
>>54295602
That argument is stupid, that would be like someone saying you're at fault when someone stepped in your bear trap when it was on your property and you had all the permits in place to be able to trap bears there.
Logically it's their fault and their fault alone.
However, I can totally see that argument flying in a court of law because the legal system is fucking retarded.
>>54295667
Are you abandoning some sort of conflation of "data" and "information?" Glad that was established. Then I refer you back to the second part of >>54295420 and >>54295469
>>54295692
>That argument is stupid
Yep, you're right.
>However, I can totally see that argument flying in a court of law
Yep, you're right again. As it's already happened, and will continue to do so until all the legal muck surrounding digital evidence finally gets hashed out in the courts. Expect this around 2133 or so.
Hard drive on one side of your head, pistol on the other
>>54293890
>the suspect, a former police department sergeant
wew I'll bet he's enjoying prison life right now
>>54295722
he's sure to be in a low security facility or otherwise separated from the sharks. A pig AND a chomo? This guy is dead in gen pop
>>54295602
>Now you're facing obstruction of justice and/or destruction of evidence charges.
For what? Cops accidentally destroy evidence all the time. Any halfway decent lawyer would be able to show that it was the officer's fault and not yours.
>>54295693
I want aware hard drives were in digital form. Anyway, I'm done and you're clearly wrong. Everyone can see it but you.
>>54295778
>I want aware hard drives were in digital form.
How harddrives retain data is in digital form. The harddrive is "information" with data in "digital form."
>>54294239
This is the most paranoind comment of the week, congratulations, Timmy Tinfoil
>>54295809
You've got a word in there which nullifies the point that hard drive = a document
>>54295886
The argument is what is an electronic document. The definition provided includes harddrives based upon the definition. Now you're trying to change the definition by inserting the term being defined into its own definition?
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html
>>54295918
>http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html
not even involved in your little debate here, but this is possibly the smuggest thing I've ever seen
>>54295933
>>54295942
So far I've had two responses and neither have add anything of substance to the discussion.
>>54295952
>>54294133
>this is LITERALLY a case of nothing to hide. if the guy was innocent he would have simply saved himself the trouble.
prove he is not covering for his pedophile son, lover or a family member to protect them, since he suspects as well that the drives would incriminate them, and they would die in jail.
>>54295878
Er, what? Not him, but you have to be an idiot to think that's "paranoid."
The FBI subpoenaed research from Carnegie Melon and hit them with a gag order so they could take down Silk Road. They aren't going to blow their load on some little case like this if they do have a back door.
>>54294204
prove he still remembers the password
>>54293890
>Scaremonger tactics with fake news to prevent use of encryption
HAHAHAHAHA, nice try FBI.
>>54296088
It seems you want to continue this discussion but rely on calculations. Allow me to use the form used in the cited fallacy then.
>X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true.
X = Harddrives are not documents. So
>[Harddrives are not documents] is true. The evidence is for this claim is that [harddrives are not documents] is true.
That is essentially what I understood was attempted when by >>54295886
Am I misunderstanding? Was the post completely devoid of any meaning?
>>54295535
In Re Boucher is probably the most pointed case on the issue.
There is a bit of disagreement amongst the circuits as to what protecrion encryption provides. The case I was thinking about regarded a pedo who was using Truecrypt. The FBI forced him to decrypt it and then used the evidence against him. His conviction was overturned in the appellate court. I remember reading about it in a Westlaw newsletter in 2014 or 2013.
>>54296173
>>54294204
This case is most certainly not a case where a person should be compelled to produce a key. He's not charged with a crime. This is purely a fishing expedition by the prosecutor. No way this holds up on appeal.
>find someone to fuck him up
>arrest him
>take his pc and encrypt it
>tell him to tell the password
>he doesn't know
>keep him in jail for life
>>54296173
Also yes it was
>>54296206
Are you posting merely because you, like a child, have an overriding need to have the last "word?" Let's test this out. There will be no point to respond to my next post as it will be "It almost hurts to be right so often." I will post it because you will shitpost yet again. Then you will respond to "It almost hurts to be right so often." proving that you have a childish need to have the last "word."
Hes a fucking retard everyone knows, that if the cops ask for the password just say you leave a piece of paper somewhere that has all the passwords on them and that they are all 30+ digits so you can't remember them
>>54296244
I stopped when I said I did
>>54296284
It almost hurts to be right so often.
>>54296268
>lying is preferable to standing up for your rights
ok...
The guy is a cop and hasn't been charged with anything. Idmf anyone knows how to keep his mout shut, its a cop. I have no doubt he was very savvy when talking to his interrogators.
>>54296268
You have a very uncharitable view of law enforcement if you think they will fall for such a meme
>>54296364
well executed lie
meme
>>54296296
Kek, I'm sure you're right all the time. Just like today
All pedos should be killed
>>54294425
How retarded are you to believe the puny shit some shit ass court thinks is above the fucking constitution?
Holy fuck why are americans this fucking dumb
>>54296378
>>54296268
You're the idiot here. He's well within his rights to refuse to hand the key over. Lying could land him in prison with a perjury charge.
He's going to get released and he'll sue the shit out of the city.
>>54293921
The NSA doesn't give a fuck about child porn.
If the hard drive had ISIS docs on it he'd still be jailed indefinitely but the army would actually know everything anyway.
>>54295113
That's reserved for higher level stuff and for stuff that doesn't make the news
>>54296496
The NSA regularly feeds information to the IRS, DEA, FBI, and local law enforcement. There is no reason they wouldn't be conerned with pedos.
>>54296478
You're the idiot. He can't sue the city because the judge held him in contempt. His imprisonment is currently legal. You don't get compensated if a ruling gets overturned unless there was gross negligence.
LAND OF THE FREE HOME OF THE BRAVE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL
> Be american
> Put password on your rar file
> 10 swat vans and 5 helicopters show up
> Jailed until you give it away
I would bet they're just trying to make an example out of him because he was a cop.
>>54296859
Get raped and kill yourself, you retarded fucking faggot sack of shit with down syndrome,
He should have installed gentoo
How could he not just say I don't know the password its not hard. Like morals aside if a lie would save you from jail time and your life ruined why tell the fucking truth.
>>54297011
I'm not entirely sure the judge would believe "I forgot the password" at this point.
>>54296979
Wow hold on there insulting people over the internet is a federal crime in america
I'm reporting you to the authorities
>>54297039
Yeah he already fucked up. But if you ever get raided you don't say shit. Just say lawyer the entire time during any questioning. They try to use tactics all the time to put you into a trust relationship until you tell them shit.
>>54297076
That is probably what he did. Though he hasn't been arrested on any underlying charges yet.
I thought mandatory key disclosure was illegal in the US because of self-incrimination?
>>54297104
It's a fairly open legal decision based on how much information they know about the contents of the drive.
>>54295487
I thought they already had. That's why america better than UK.
You guys realize the government can do whatever the fuck it wants outside the bounds of law, and people are going to forget about this by tomorrow and this guy is going to spend the rest of his life in prison right?
>>54294908
I'm sorry I misremembered the evidence, let me amend my testimony
>>54297193
He won't spend the rest of his life in jail. There's never been a case where someone was held in contempt foelr their whole life. Odds are he'll be out in a few months once the appellate court reviews this.
Why is the government so overzealous when it comes to technology and encryption?
>>54295099
>shuffle fifty $100 notes
Will do Bill Gates
>>54297302
>being so poor that you can't afford a $5000 password manager
>>54294013
>he's been jailed
with this shit hitting the fan he'll definitely appeal and sue to the highest order of the state
they literally denied and refused to acknowledge the law and rights
>>54297331
You could also do it with a stack of cards with numbers on them. Better yet, a deck from a game in which the cards have numbers. 30 cards would mean 30! combinations. Cops will likely knock them over.
>americucks always spout "muh freedums"
>it's the fucking opposite
>>54297494
Why do you think Americans are always going on about
>muh tyrannical government
Because we have one
>>54297150
But isn't that based upon physical evidence and contents actually found on the HDD? THey can't just assume that he has CP.
>>54296223
Holy shit that's actually doable
>>54297494
It's the post 9/11 world we live in, North America and Europe passed lots of "anti terror" laws which essentially enable them to do anything they please.
We have no rights any more.
What if he just forgot the password
>>54297625
That is why this case is so ridiculous. He hasn't even been charged with a crime.
The only cases where people have been forced to decrypt are where the contents of the drive are a foregone conclusion because they have so much other evidence.
>>54296223
Actually, if the victim took the stand, he could plead with the court that he had no idea his pc was encrypted, and MIGHT persuade the judge. It's easier to be convincing when you're telling the truth. Then again, no one might give a fuck in the face of "hard evidence".
>>54296175
> The FBI forced him to decrypt it and then used the evidence against him. His conviction was overturned in the appellate court.
Seems to be the exact opposite then.
>>54297931
Yes, which is why this case is causing such a stir. It seems like a case of a pissed off judge going rogue. Even the most conservative circuits haven't supported such a tyrannical interpretation of the forced decryption issue.
>>54293890
Checkmate back
>>54297964
I thought it sounded suspect when someone claimed a consensus of the circuits agreed with what is happening here.
>>54298033
Perhaps you misread a prior post of mine in this thread. No circuit has upheld a forced decryption without clear evidence that the prosecutor already knows the contents. There is a spectrum of how much evidence is required depending on the circuit. There has never been another case where someone has been forced to decrypt without even a formal indictment.
How long until encryption ban of HDDs / files is coming.
Tbh EU is adapting the same strategy if you look closely they are planning this all.
They are trying to get the people behind them, encryption is a very very hot topic lately.
>>54298133
The only scenario in which the banning of encryption would be possible would be under a totalitarian state like North Korea. People could just program a new encryption standard or just use already open standards like RSA with gpg.
Why didn't he just say that he does not have the password memorized and he written it down on a piece of paper that he left somewhere like his desk?
Then when they look for it and not find it, flip out that they lost it?
Fuck.
>>54295364
>anime faggot jailed indefinitely for irreversibly deleting encryption key
>>54294154
No, because it's not worth exposing that ace up their sleeves for this
>>54295463
>>54295487
he showed his sister the child porn and she reported him. Ball is in his court now to show that she's a liar. She's not though, so he's going to hope to God that some judge saves him.
>>54293890
"I forgot the password."
:^)
>>54300462
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>>54300725
>not using the smiley with a carat nose
>>54300806
>using a picture of the smiley with a carat nose
>>54294560
Thread
>>54300455
They don't have enough evidence to even indict him. There's no reason a judge should be able to force him to decrypt it.
>Muh psychic police threw me in prison for seven years
Why close Guantanamo Bay when you can just move it to USA
>murrica
>>54294902
The US government unlocks your front door when they got a warrant to your house. If they obtained a warrant for his computer then he should 100% have to decrypt his laptop. People are going crazy about encryption. The government didn't fucking know computers were going to be invented years and years ago. They would of definitely have clear defined laws that you must decrypt your computer if a proper warrant was obtained.
>>54301453
Congress passed the Patriot Act in under two weeks. The speed at which technology develops is no excuse for a lack of laws governing encryption.
A lock is hardly an apt comparison. Encryption is more similar to a hand ciphered text. If I were to communicate with another person in our own cipher, the government would have to compel my speech to get me to reveal the cipher. Doing such would be a violation of the 5th amendment unless I was given full immunity.
>>54301453
>The US government unlocks your front door when they got a warrant to your house.
The government unlocks your front door. They don't make you unlock your front door.
