The FBI can't crack hard drive encryption

[Slyer]

What if you don't remember them?

[SMOKEU]

So you have to decide between an indefinite stay in jail, or giving up the encryption keys.

Are we still talking about NZ?

[p.dath]

What if you don't remember them?

You'll have to convince the Judge. I think "I can't remember" won't be very convincing.

Are we still talking about NZ?

Yes. Getting more draconian.

[onearmedbandit]

You'll have to convince the Judge. I think "I can't remember" won't be very convincing.

It would be up to the court to prove that you can remember, and short of stealing your thoughts in your dreams Inception stylz I don't see how they could do that.

[tigertim20]

There's been lots of changes to our laws in this area, i'd be surprised if we'd have the right to remain silent on passwords if suspected of something dodgy...... (anyone know for surez?)

something about your right to remain silent in NZ, and in the USA, you have a constitutional right not to say anything that might incriminate yourself. remember, the burden of proof lies with the accuser. so fuck them.

[gammaguy]

so the logical conclusion of that is a jail full of child pr0n owners who "forgot"their passwords

which throws up an interesting question-at what stage of disc data recovery(assuming a password has not been forthcoming) does a fragmented bunch of data become a crime?

[Usarka]

something about your right to remain silent in NZ, and in the USA, you have a constitutional right not to say anything that might incriminate yourself. remember, the burden of proof lies with the accuser. so fuck them.

Nope - we don't have a constitution in NZ. Laws can be made at any time to override old ones.

Just found an article here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-governm...ectid=10689847

I only gave it a quick skim but at a glance it looks like you can remain silent if it's going to incriminate yourself, but you have to hand it over if it might incriminate someone else. My immediate thought is then that if you don't hand it over you are impliciltly confessing guilt.

[p.dath]

It would be up to the court to prove that you can remember, and short of stealing your thoughts in your dreams Inception stylz I don't see how they could do that.

Negative, that law does not work that way. You don't have any right to remain silent, and they don't have to prove guilt. I think the burden of proof is "suspicion". So if they can establish reasonable suspicion then it is game over.

[Mental Trousers]

You don't have to remember your encryption keys. Most of them are too long to reliably memorize. So the way to make sure the bad men don't get hold of them is to set up something automated, either a cronjob, or a check when the machine is rebooted, a dead man's switch, whatever and if the check fails the keys are deleted.

[onearmedbandit]

Negative, that law does not work that way. You don't have any right to remain silent, and they don't have to prove guilt. I think the burden of proof is "suspicion". So if they can establish reasonable suspicion then it is game over.

So what you are telling me, is that if your passwords, which were long complex strings of random numbers and letters therefore virtually impossible to remember, were destroyed in a fire for example and you have no chance of remembering them, then how the fuck does 'you don't have any right to remain silent' going to help your case then. So, will they hold you indefinitely?

[SMOKEU]

so the logical conclusion of that is a jail full of child pr0n owners who "forgot"their passwords

which throws up an interesting question-at what stage of disc data recovery(assuming a password has not been forthcoming) does a fragmented bunch of data become a crime?

The government doesn't really have any way of finding kiddy porn on someones computer unless they deliberately snoop around on that persons computer looking for evidence. Going on Google and typing in "child porn torrent downloads" is likely to arouse suspicion.

[Ronin]

The government doesn't really have any way of finding kiddy porn on someones computer unless they deliberately snoop around on that persons computer looking for evidence. Going on Google and typing in "child porn torrent downloads" is likely to arouse suspicion.

Hahahahahahaha. You just keep on believing that.

[p.dath]

So what you are telling me, is that if your passwords, which were long complex strings of random numbers and letters therefore virtually impossible to remember, were destroyed in a fire for example and you have no chance of remembering them, then how the fuck does 'you don't have any right to remain silent' going to help your case then. So, will they hold you indefinitely?

All encryptions I have used require a human input to use them. Could be a pass key. Could be a finger print. Could be a smart card. Could be a one time key.

If you refuse the provide the mechanism to decrypt the data when a court has ordered you to hand them over then you can go to jail.

[p.dath]

The government doesn't really have any way of finding kiddy porn on someones computer unless they deliberately snoop around on that persons computer looking for evidence. Going on Google and typing in "child porn torrent downloads" is likely to arouse suspicion.

Perhaps you are not familiar with an electronic interception warrant?

Most ISPs have the capability to mirror a users data to another port for collection, and this can also be done under an electronic interception warrant. Personally, I like using the free Wireshark to analyse the traffic dumps.

There is plenty of software out there that installs like a root kit, so you can not tell it is installed, then can monitor your machine - which can be legally installed with an electronic interception warrant.