http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/12/in-t...cal-noise-too/There was some surprise in the comments of yesterday’s post over the fact that the United Kingdom has effectively outlawed encryption: the UK will send its citizens to jail for up to five years if they cannot produce the key to an encrypted data set.
The V For Vendetta universe is closer to reality...
Join Team SnusOn, and fold to cure disease
Seen snus in a store? Tell us here, and add it to the map here
Okay, but riddle me this: What if I have a true-crypt hidden volume, how do the rules apply to that? The feature allows you to have an encrypted folder, with 2 sets of passwords, one is the real password that will reveal all the stuff you were actually trying to hide, and the other password is used in case someone forces you at the point of a gun to give them the password, and leads to a different set of encrypted files that are essentially decoys.UK will send its citizens to jail for up to five years if they cannot produce the key to an encrypted data set.
So if the government says "Sgreger1, pick up that can and then tell me the password to that encrypted file", if I give them the dummy password I technically have not evaded the law as I did give it up to them and decrypted what they think they were after (assuming they don't figure out that there is a hidden layer to it). How does the law deal with this?
To outlaw encryption is the same as outlawing one's ability to lock the doors to their home before they leave for work. To not lock your car door after parking vehicle, to not put childproof locks on the kitchen sink so baby doesn't eat the drano. The idea that one can not secure their posessions, be those physical items or data sets, is proposterous and is something only fascists would impose upon their citizens.
Encrypting a file on my computer is no different than putting a lock on my luggage before a flight. Oh wait, you already have to give them the password to that too if they want to peek inside. We are already there America, it's not the coming police state, it's the police world, and it's arrived yesterday.
www.OutdoorHydro.com - Follow me in my hydroponic adventures!
It's whatever they say it is. If they aren't happy with the result, they'll put you in jail anyway. Same as torturing someone until you get the results you want. You either get information, or kill the person in the process.Originally Posted by sgreger1
Join Team SnusOn, and fold to cure disease
Seen snus in a store? Tell us here, and add it to the map here
The distinctions between physical belonging and digital sets of data such as software, files with information, lines of code, or a missive one wrote in MS Word about wanting to wage Jihad against the US government, need to be made clear. The distinction between the two is that there should be no distinction between the two. If I wrote a book and have it printed on a press and maintain it in my house, that is my book, my property, and I may lock it in a bag or in a safe if I do so wish. The same goes with encrypting any of my data.
Then again, if I have a document locked in a safe or stored ina bag of luggage, they can already ask me open that for any arbitrary reason adn without a court order, so I guess it doesn't really matter at this point. Property rights, as well as the 4th ammendment have long fallen by the wayside in this country and in all other countries.
The question is, what is the next step? What will be the new way to hide things in a manner such that the government could not compel you to give it to them freely and without warrant? Encryption was always that thing, now it seems in order to hide something safely we will have to log on to CJDNS darknets and share the information through local nodes on an SSL encrypted stream that somehow has another layer of protection on it that will make the government keep their hands off it.
With the ruling that you have to decrypt anything they want, I don't see any more ways of hiding things that are none of their business. A sad day.
www.OutdoorHydro.com - Follow me in my hydroponic adventures!
Remember the WikiLeaks Insurance File that was released some time ago? It was an encrypted file that thousands of people downloaded, just so they would have it in case the password was released. All those people would, with this kind of law, go to jail for possessing it.
Also:
Falkvinge: In the UK, you will go to jail not just for encryption, but for astronomical noise, too
www.OutdoorHydro.com - Follow me in my hydroponic adventures!
Something most people seem to be missing is that this law makes no sense at all. There are two possible scenarios:
1) You're innocent of any crime except hiding your personal information (say, your sexvids with your mistress). You might be convinced by this law to give up your privacy, but it won't be of any use to law enforcement. Or you might have to keep it private and be jailed, as a criminal, even though you are not. Again, law enforcement does not gain anything from this, worse, you become a red herring for them.
2) You ARE guilty of terrorism or child abuse. In that case, you will NEVER surrender the information and eat the jail sentence for hiding the stuff, rather than risk being prosecuted for the crimes you actually committed. Again, law enforcement is not helped in their investigation at all.
So this law does NOT help law enforcement at all. Cui bono? Who DOES it help? It would certainly help a totalitarian government keeping tabs on opposition and whistleblowers. Thank God we don't have a totalitarian government....oh...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks