Decrypt Your Laptop Or Else!

Do you believe in your Fifth Amendment right to not be compelled to bear witness against yourself? Do you believe that right extends to the properties of your mind? Apparently federal Judge Robert Blackburn doesn't and will make you cough up your passwords or face contempt of court.

Cnet Article

While I do believe that this woman should be prosecuted, I don't think that she should be compelled to divulge her intellectual property under penalty of law. I know the gov't has computer forensic specialists that could probably circumvent her encryption so why don't they go that route? In an earlier decision, it was ruled that a man couldn't be forced to reveal his passphrase without violating his Fifth Amendment.

Cnet Article

Perhaps what is needed (and maybe already exists) is a two password system.

Using the 'fake' password appears to decrypt the computer normally and all files appear to be available... but in fact there is a section still hidden.

reply to post by Infra_red


Decrypting PGP without the key would require a super computer and several years to do. She is a fool if she gives them the key. Especially if the data will incriminate her. She should just say in all the stress she has forgotten where she hid the key and and does not know it by heart. Jail for a few days or weeks for contempt of court is much better then prison. I have no sympathy for the banks at all they have been stealing for centuries and are doing it more then ever now.

reply to post by alfa1


They have a very useful app for the iPhone (and probably other smart phones) that do just that... It's good for storing sensitive media. It works great, if you enter 3 passwords it "opens up" as if you guessed the right one... But it takes you to a fake folder and even the whole app in "fake" mode.

I wonder if they have something similar for computers.... Hmm...

reply to post by Infra_red


Well my solution to that would be a custom linux boot menu that maskes itself as a "Decryption Password" screen that, once a password is entered, actually physically wipes the drive, while installing itself much like a root kit, to continue the wipe as soon as the machine boots.

5 level pass "zero out" of a drive is considered "government level" 7 would be NSA level.

But that's the thing, you've already encrypted the data, so even if 1 pass completes, you should be protected.

But of course, I'm not giving advice on how to hack, or how to evade electronic laws.

in the uk here. someone got locked up when they refused to hand over their encryption key... it sucks

Originally posted by alfa1
Perhaps what is needed (and maybe already exists) is a two password system.

Using the 'fake' password appears to decrypt the computer normally and all files appear to be available... but in fact there is a section still hidden.

If they really want to know what is on your machine, all they need to is to hand it over to the nutcrackers to break it. In effect, you can run, but you can't hide (if they really want your hidden data).

I dont think you realize what kind of processing power is requierd. Even for a single case it would have to be a high profile case to warrant that degree of work, nevermind several cases.

reply to post by alfa1


Yes it already exists, a popular one is 'Truecrypt'

www.truecrypt.org...

I just read this article not ten minutes ago, and quite honestly, I'm on the fence about the whole ordeal.

I understand the 5th Amendment Rights of not incriminating yourself, but I also understand the need to catch certain individuals who would use these encrypted HDD's (child pornographers come to mind) to hide data that would get them into a lot of trouble, not to mention jail time. The problem is that there isn't a catch-all solution for this problem, which it seems that the courts want to have. The precedent set by this potential ruling is not only reckless, but dangerous. Who is to say that the RIAA or MPAA wouldn't sick their government lapdogs on an individual downloading movies or music (a less offensive crime than let's say, a child pornographer), and force them to reveal the passcode for their machines? They have done just that in the past (minus the revealing of encryption codes).

One of the comments in that article mentioned setting up a passcode that would make the computer look normal upon start up, but either zero out the HDD in the background, or keep the protected data in a hidden partition. Should this law only apply to certain crimes? Can it be written as so?

It seems to me that there could be some good things that could come from this law, but the bad things outweigh the good ones, at least in my opinion.


-TS

Well you have to think what's on that hard drive.

Is it worse to be convicted of contempt of court... OR is it worse for them to see what's on that hard drive?

reply to post by Vitchilo


It would be hard to be convicted of contempt of court if the passcode was randomly generated alphanumeric characters. The answer would simply be: "I'm sorry your honor, but I cannot recall the passcode, and the paper that has the passcode written on it has been lost." In this case, I think one would be safe from prosecution. Unless, of course, the judge didn't believe you. It would still be better to be held for a few days in a local jail as opposed to 30 years in a prison. Just depends on the data on the HDD.

-TS

Originally posted by alfa1
Perhaps what is needed (and maybe already exists) is a two password system.

Using the 'fake' password appears to decrypt the computer normally and all files appear to be available... but in fact there is a section still hidden.

I have an EVEN better solution...ok your going to think this a bit out there but hear me out...

How about.....wait for it.......the government....mind their own F#&*ING business.

I know crazy right??

Originally posted by alfa1
Perhaps what is needed (and maybe already exists) is a two password system.

Using the 'fake' password appears to decrypt the computer normally and all files appear to be available... but in fact there is a section still hidden.

I dare say I'm one of the few who has profound knowledge on FDE (Full Disk Encryption).

My advise is for anyone out there to get one which has
■ destruction password
■ decoy OS

Don't worry once everything is stored in the cloud you won't need passwords !!! Right

Modern encryption algorithms are very reliable, with no backdoor, and getting to the data without the correct key is practically impossible.

I also read somewhere that it is possible to encrypt data in such a way that when decrypted by a designated alternative key it shows a different content. That could be another way to defeat 5th amendment violations like the one in the OP.

Originally posted by Maslo
I also read somewhere that it is possible to encrypt data in such a way that when decrypted by a designated alternative key it shows a different content. That could be another way to defeat 5th amendment violations like the one in the OP.

That's right, I already posted a link to a popular piece of open source encryption software above that will reveal 'safe' files on a duress password being entered compared to the 'true' content with the real key.

Originally posted by truthseeker1984
The problem is that there isn't a catch-all solution for this problem, which it seems that the courts want to have. The precedent set by this potential ruling is not only reckless, but dangerous. Who is to say that the RIAA or MPAA wouldn't sick their government lapdogs on an individual downloading movies or music (a less offensive crime than let's say, a child pornographer), and force them to reveal the passcode for their machines?

Exactly!

I could see why a child pornographer would never give up his password.

For them its ether spend years in jail in a regular cell in general population OR in a special lockup and then registered as a sex offender the rest of there life.

There are other crimes that may be just as dangerous to get convicted of where its.

If what you have encrypted would result in a felony conviction and Contempt of court that is nether a felony or a misdemeanor the idea of keeping silent maybe the best even if you do time in jail

The longest time served in jail for Contempt of court is 14 years.
In civil contempt cases there is no principle of proportionality. In Chadwick v. Janecka (3d Cir. 2002), a U.S. court of appeals held that H. Beatty Chadwick could be held indefinitely under federal law, for his failure to produce US$ 2.5 mill. as state court ordered in a civil trial. Chadwick had been imprisoned for nine years at that time and continued to be held in prison until 2009, when a state court set him free after 14 years, making his imprisonment the longest on a contempt charge to date.

I would have told the judge that he apparently doesn't understand the constitution and needs to step down before hes disbarred, but i'm sure there's something in the UCC that someone could throw in the judges face to get him to walk away, because you can legally sue the judge if he attempts to circumvent or manipulate the law