Man imprisoned for not giving police password.

[Energize]

Hate to tell ya this but bestiality is now considered a jail crime and or atleast being put on the list , since late last year. Copper in the family ^

It was actually significantly decriminalised in 2003, most acts are now legal so it could still be a valid reason for someone to withhold encryption keys.

I can only say that this should be a lesson to all of us to use deniable forms of encryption to prevent ending up in this situation ourselves.

 

[Demon]

You aren't seriously going to argue that "the law" is the ultimate and absolute definition of right and wrong, are you? The law can be changed at the whim of politicians, and varies country by country, whereas "right and wrong" are abstract constructs dependent on personal perception and experience. Does smoking cannabis automatically become "right" when you are in Holland, or "wrong" in the UK? Does stoning a woman to death for being raped (i.e. sex outside marriage) become "right" when you enter Iran?

Right and wrong ARE defined by personal viewpoint. There will inevitably be circumstances where this personal viewpoint comes into conflict with the law, and the punishments it can dole out. In these circumstances it is up to the individual to decide whether his or her principles are worth the potential punishments of the law.

Arguing the most obvious fact that everyone can have a different perception of right and wrong is fruitless and meaningless, and serves no purpose in reality..

How do you know he was wrong to withhold his password? We don't even know why he was under suspicion.

All societies are policed and have laws, whether you like it or not, the only 'measure' of right and wrong (And I obviously don't personally agree with them on every count) is the laws that society has.. It doesn't mean you have to live your life by them, but you will be held accountable to them.

I am not saying I agree or disagree with the law in this case, but as it stands today, on a technical level, by the only absolute measure available and applicable, he was wrong..

 

[Delvis]

Yes, it is. Because you keep posting things like 'there are ways' in an unnecessarily cryptic manner. You could even just refer to these fabricated 'decryption methods' loosely, or making a passing reference to the way the system works, but instead you choose to say nothing apart from 'seriously guys, trust me, there ARE WAYS'.

Only available conclusion - you are absolutely chock-full of hot air. Nobody believes a word you are saying.

As for the kid who's gone to prison rather than show police his illegal copy of Adobe Photoshop, of course he's got something to hide. He's unlikely to be the sort of character who is acting on some kind of privacy crusade on behalf of the human race.

'seriously guys, trust me, there ARE WAYS'.

Never actually stated that in those words, but whatever floats your boat.

Sorry dude, but if it reaches the stage where he is in court with under age photos on his PC (17 year old or less), the guy IMO, is going to get a sentence.

Am I missing something? Why are people quoting 17? Surely it would be less than 16? If the photos are proven to be allowed by both parties involved.

Below legal age the yes theres a serious problem...Unless you're talking about extreme pictures then yeah

 

[gambitt]

If the police go to all the trouble of investigating this guy, filling out loads of paperwork etc what do you think they will do?

"ok no problem mate, I see you just have nekkid pics of a 17 year old so we'll let you off this time"

or

"you're nicked sunshine"

Police want results, they don't do "favours" once it's gone this far.

 

[sunama]

If the police turned up at your house with a warrant to search your house, would you refuse them entry?

I wouldn't because it would be utterly futile. If you refuse them entry they would simply arrest you and go inside anyway. If they requested a key and you refused they could just break the lock, again not a good outcome. If they request a password they have absolutely no way around, the power is all yours.

He wrote, what I was thinking.

 

[edscdk]

It was actually significantly decriminalised in 2003, most acts are now legal so it could still be a valid reason for someone to withhold encryption keys.

I can only say that this should be a lesson to all of us to use deniable forms of encryption to prevent ending up in this situation ourselves.

do they have to use the same program to de-crypt the data? how universal is encryption, if I give a lab a data stream an no other info can they start trying to de-crypt it?

 

[Duff-Man]

Arguing the most obvious fact that everyone can have a different perception of right and wrong is fruitless and meaningless, and serves no purpose in reality..

All societies are policed and have laws, whether you like it or not, the only 'measure' of right and wrong (And I obviously don't personally agree with them on every count) is the laws that society has.. It doesn't mean you have to live your life by them, but you will be held accountable to them.

I am not saying I agree or disagree with the law in this case, but as it stands today, on a technical level, by the only absolute measure available and applicable, he was wrong..

We're getting towards semantics now, but you need to separate the words "right" and "wrong", which are products of personal perception, away from "the law". They are very different things. The law is tangible, and has far more real-world implications, but it is still entirely different to the concept of right and wrong (which are inherently personal and vary strongly from persona to person, and based on context).

In the ideal situation, the law attempts to emulate the view of right and wrong in the broader populations. In the worst case, it is constructed according to the whims of a dictator, or to keep a particular person or class of people in power. In most real-world cases it lies somewhere between the two.

Your point that the law has far more real-world impact in a society is, of course, correct. But that does not imply that it is a good measure of "right" or "wrong". The two concepts are entirely separate and must always be viewed as such.

 

[sunama]

If the police go to all the trouble of investigating this guy, filling out loads of paperwork etc what do you think they will do?

"ok no problem mate, I see you just have nekkid pics of a 17 year old so we'll let you off this time"

or

"you're nicked sunshine"

Police want results, they don't do "favours" once it's gone this far.

EXACTLY!!!

The Police will do their job and that is to detect, investigate and report the crime. They then create statements and evidence exhibits which they submit to the CPS. The CPS then decide which offences ultimately reach the law courts and what gets dropped.

The Police would never let you "off", after they have committed so much resources to a case...especially if the media have picked up on it.

 

[sunama]

do they have to use the same program to de-crypt the data? how universal is encryption, if I give a lab a data stream an no other info can they start trying to de-crypt it?

They can try, but there is no guarantee that they will succeed in decrypting all the information and/or how long it will take.

Virtually every password can be cracked...eventually. Its just a question of whether or not the powers that be want to commit so many resources into attempting to find the password. 50 characters is a long password and it does make me chuckle when I think that there are people out there who have passwords which are this long.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Whilst I take the 'its our right!' point if you were being accused of having kiddy porn and could prove yourself innocent by simply handing over an encryption key yet chose to go to jail instead of doing this, you've got to wonder..

It makes me wonder what his legal advice was during consultation as well ?

 

[Amnesia]

Give over, you'd rather take 16 weeks in jail, get a criminal record and lose your job than have a police officer view a video of you having sex with your wife? Sure its embarrasing and in an ideal world I'd hate it but its got to beat ruining the rest of your life, right?

not sure really...a bunch of guys threatening me with 16 weeks in jail if they dont get to see my wife naked.
it doesn't sit too well with me....unless they are female police officers only.

so when would you defend your partner if ever, maybe a checkpoint and a few guys want to search her thoroughly...would you defend her or demand she bend over in the name of the law ?

or are you going to avoid the question

 

[Vonhelmet]

He wrote, what I was thinking.

Just confirmed what I was thinking, that your principles revolve around the unbreakable nature of the encryption, rather than an adherence to a belief in privacy.

 

[RandomNoob]

I think there's a fine line between maintaining your principals and cutting your nose to spite your face. I think in some cases it's just easier for you to cooperate and get it over and done with.

So if your arrested and the police tell you that rather than wait 2 hours for your solicitor to arrive it would be quicker to just not have legal representation and just be questioned/interviewed?

 

[sunama]

Just confirmed what I was thinking, that your principles revolve around the unbreakable nature of the encryption, rather than an adherence to a belief in privacy.

I believe in both.

 

[Demon]

We're getting towards semantics now, but you need to separate the words "right" and "wrong", which are products of personal perception, away from "the law". They are very different things. The law is tangible, and has far more real-world implications, but it is still entirely different to the concept of right and wrong (which are inherently personal and vary strongly from persona to person, and based on context).

But that is so obvious, and a cop-out, of course anyone can say 'morally' their personal view on right and wrong for a given situation, but then the guy isn't judged by what you or I think, so what weight does it really have on the discussion, other then a nice casual observation.
The only thing that really matters to the guy is what the law dictates is right and wrong, so why bother saying with some conviction that he is 'right' when he has been put in jail for a very distinct and undisputed crime?

In the ideal situation, the law attempts to emulate the view of right and wrong in the broader populations. In the worst case, it is constructed according to the whims of a dictator, or to keep a particular person or class of people in power. In most real-world cases it lies somewhere between the two.

Your point that the law has far more real-world impact in a society is, of course, correct. But that does not imply that it is a good measure of "right" or "wrong". The two concepts are entirely separate and must always be viewed as such.

You are again thinking I am confused about 'morality' and 'legality', I am not. Right and Wrong apply to both, the difference being, someone's moral stance is nice to know but ultimately meaningless, the measure by which he is most affected is the legality of his actions.

That's all I'm saying..

 

[Energize]

do they have to use the same program to de-crypt the data? how universal is encryption, if I give a lab a data stream an no other info can they start trying to de-crypt it?

It depends on the implementation, typically you need to use the same program to access your data but not always.

All a lab needs is the encrypted data to start trying to decrypt it, which simply is a case of trying every single possible encryption key.

 

[Duff-Man]

You are again confusing 'moral' with 'legal', one is a perception that is nice to know I guess, but fruitless, and the other far more absolute, and in this case, much more meaningful.. right and wrong are not exclusive terms for morality.

I am not confusing anything. I am the one arguing that you need to separate the two principles ("morality and legality") You were the one suggesting that legality is a good measure of morality (right and wrong)... Read the previous posts.

As for your first point, I never suggested that personal perception has any legal weight, only that it is always an option to stick to such personal principles in the face of the law and the punishments it can bring.

 

[tntcoder]

It depends on the implementation, typically you need to use the same program to access your data but not always.

All a lab needs is the encrypted data to start trying to decrypt it, which simply is a case of trying every single possible encryption key.

They also need to know the cipher, block size, key size and mode of operation. If you just give a lab a raw ciphertext they are fubared. Depends if the software used couples this information with the ciphertext they may receive.

 

[sunama]

They also need to know the cipher, block size, key size and mode of operation. If you just give a lab a raw ciphertext they are fubared. Depends if the software used couples this information with the ciphertext they may receive.

You seem to know about encryption. Do you do this for a living or is it just an interest?

 

[deus3x]

So AES encryption using truecrypt with a 50key password is SOLD as it comes then??