Decrypt your drives or go to jail indefinitely!

reply to post by Gazrok

How many people encrypt files if they don't have something to hide?

Who says what he is hiding is illegal?
Income tax files.
Dirty pictures of the wife.
I'm sure you can come up with others.

Plus him being a computer expert you can't expect him to use simple encryption. He's gonna use top notch software.

It's a shame the .gov doesn't use this software to protect our secrets from the Chinese.

reply to post by samkent


Very true. I meant more about the sheer volume of encrypted data. Of course, now that I think about it, I can think of several reasons for that too....(a from home accountant, for example).

Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

The Constitution is in place to protect ALL American citizens, and if we start making exceptions for particular cases eventually it would lead to no protection for anyone as more and more exceptions would be made until the Constitution is eroded completely.

I agree but in the name of protecting all American citizens exceptions are already in place concerning drugs/terrorism.

What could be gleaned from his hidden files? Could it save the lives of children who, by the very nature of the industry, are in imminent danger?

If the constitution is the last word then it should be across the board, no picking choosing who loses rights. If imminent danger is all that's required to forgo rights in the war on drugs/terror, then imo it should apply here as well or not at all.

Originally posted by terriblyvexed
They should just crack them themselves.

I don't understand the law well enough to say if it's an infringement on his rights,I guess computers weren't considered at the time..lol

Indefinite detention with no trial that is just wrong (scum bag should be strung up) and violates his rights.

Depending on the encryption a brute force attack could take years.
If he rar'd his files with encryption and the password is longer than 10 characters it could be impossible to crack.

Even with the latest techniques and hardware cracking encrypted files is not an easy thing to do.

reply to post by Morningglory
There should not be exceptions made for drugs or terrorism either, the exception being non-citizen terrorists or drug dealers/smugglers as the Constitution should only pertain to American citizens. It is my stance that when such exceptions are made it violates our Constitutional rights and that should not be allowed- period.

reply to post by tadaman

Unless he wrote some out of this world encryption algorithms the police should ask other agencies to assist with the decryption if they lack the resources. It is embarrassing that with the money thrown at defence and law enforcement that they have to ask this shlob for help in a case against him because he spent a couple bucks on some over the counter commercial software.

According to mycrypto.net
128 bit

Assuming ideal performance and no downtime, one should be able to exhaustively search the key-space in over 20,000 years.

Asking other agencies for help is futile.

reply to post by davespanners

Originally posted by davespanners

I think the issue isn't that the police need permission to unencrypt the file but rather that i would take an inordinate amount of time and resources for them to be able to decrypt it at all.
So rather than a filing cabinet [color=E6DEB8]imagine an impenetrable safe with a 3000000000 number combination lock and you will be sent to jail if you refuse to tell the police the combination

I don't actually know what it takes in order to encrypt or decrypt, so I'm not sure whether or not this is a feasible possibility.....


Could he get away with just 'playing dumb'?

Maybe something similar to, "Sorry, but I just can't remember how to decrypt those files. I had written some pertinent notes down on a piece of paper, but I have no idea where it's at now. Last time I saw it, was before you guys came in and trashed my house. I don't know what you did with it."

digital information is information.

This is similar to them saying: "I am going to throw you in jail until you tell me all your secrets!"


Erm..no.


I don't care what the person allegedly did..either they figure out how to decrypt it themselves, or they go with whatever evidence they already have.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


if he has nothing to hide then open said files,
if he wont open files hes hiding something so

"simples"

Originally posted by Morningglory

Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

The Constitution is in place to protect ALL American citizens, and if we start making exceptions for particular cases eventually it would lead to no protection for anyone as more and more exceptions would be made until the Constitution is eroded completely.

I agree but in the name of protecting all American citizens exceptions are already in place concerning drugs/terrorism.

What could be gleaned from his hidden files? Could it save the lives of children who, by the very nature of the industry, are in imminent danger?

If the constitution is the last word then it should be across the board, no picking choosing who loses rights. If imminent danger is all that's required to forgo rights in the war on drugs/terror, then imo it should apply here as well or not at all.

You made a strong case, not for the potential child porn collector, but for anyone whom downloads things like the survivalist guide, anarchists cookbook, etc...
The porn stuff isn't imminent danger..its pics or whatnot of a crime that happened long ago..but some anti-government person learning how to make bombs and the like..now that is an imminent threat.

So yeah. best to just stick with principle of constitution before morality..like a jerk genie, careful what you wish for. ATS is more of a threat than some 15 year olds pics to the government

Originally posted by maryhinge
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

if he has nothing to hide then open said files,
if he wont open files hes hiding something so

"simples"

Tell me every secret you have...tell all of ATS
Every single deep, dark secret, thought, etc.

I mean, if you don't, then your hiding something...right?

Maybe every hard drive and browser history should be considered public record and put in a global database anyone can go review at any time.

what nonsense

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

If a judge orders you to decrypt the only existing copies of incriminating files, are your constitutional rights against compelled self-incrimination being violated?
...
In this case, it would appear to be the argument that because it's electronic and not verbal, it doesn't warrant the same protections?

You have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be used against you in a court of law.

Then there's gitmo. Where they put the silent ones.

As long as places like gitmo exists, and are accepted, the Constitution itself is irrelevant.

By simply "re-labeling" the citizen, you can remove all his constitutional rights.

It used to be, that people were labeled "communist", and became blacklisted and unable to find work, required to attend senate hearings etc..to discuss their persuasion.

Today, there are new terms, "terrorist", "enemy combatants", and just plain "uncooperative" individuals.

The Rabbit Hole keeps getting deeper and deeper.

Originally posted by SaturnFX


Tell me every secret you have...tell all of ATS
Every single deep, dark secret, thought, etc.

I mean, if you don't, then your hiding something...right?

What if you don't have any secrets?

But they believe you do. Remember the Witch hunts in the dark ages?

reply to post by maryhinge


I mentioned this on the last page, but they already have him for at least 2 confirmed videos. The rest is speculation on what else/ volume on the remaining drives. Maybe CP, maybe completely innocent.

reply to post by littled16
Thank you for your response. I agree 100%. I'm tired of all the reinterpretation of the constitution to fit the popular political agenda of the day.

Mucking with the constitution should always be a red flag. It's just odd that some are quite comfortable selecting out certain parts as long as it ensures public safety/fits an agenda. I guess pedos aren't scary enough yet.

I think in exceptional cases like this, i.e. child related, then you should lose your rights, because it's to help make the world a safer place, and that can't be a bad thing.

reply to post by KingErik

Originally posted by KingErik

What if you don't have any secrets?

But they believe you do. Remember the Witch hunts in the dark ages?

Isn't that the whole point?

Regardless of whether or not you have something to hide, 'they' should not be legally allowed to force you to expose yourself.

Originally posted by DeeKlassified
I think in exceptional cases like this, i.e. child related, then you should lose your rights, because it's to help make the world a safer place, and that can't be a bad thing.

What about potential rape of an adult?
What about dangerous drug manufacturing or terrorism?
I don't have kids, I am more concerned about someone learning burglary...so potential burglers should also lose their rights to make the world a safer place in my opinion given that is a direct threat to me.

Also speeders...

its not a slippery slope..its a cliff.

Something just occurred to me to bring up here. Perhaps some of ATS's Police members can address this for an answer?

Why did they get warrants and go kicking doors for the hope that maybe he'd have what they wanted? Why hope he may give them passwords or keys? (The latter being a reasonable expectation these days..or at least a reasonable possibility to find being used).

I've read a number of books over the years of the non-fiction variety about both Organized Crime and Espionage cases where they cared to get the people and get it air tight and done right. In those cases, they bug the living crap out of locations in both Audio and later, when tech allowed it for reasonable costs, Video. Not Undercovers that would require massive resources for a kiddie porn guy, but just a single 'excursion' to the home, with warrant, to bug the place for sound and video? Either could easily be recorded without a whole team to monitor it, as was usually required in O.C. cases.

With that approach, they could literally FILM the guy watching his kiddie porn videos and pictures on his computer AS WELL AS whatever he typed in or used to decrypt his little stashes of files. All in hand and before the door kickers came to collect him up for prosecution. Who knows, they may have just found more they aren't even aware of, even now.

So why not? Why don't they approach some of these really heinous cases with the same technology and tools as other cases they've been used in? If they care..they care to do it right?? Or is that it? The 'Do it right' just isn't worth the trouble when half ass work DOES work in 8 out of 10 cases anyway?

Any Law Enforcement want to take that one for a trip around the dance floor?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Disclaimer, not a LEO, so I am only reporting what I read.

I took a look at the Search Warrant request (they tell more than is generally released to the media). They have him on at least 2 confirmed videos and 3 other suspected (they were reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children as likely by other law enforcement). The warrant was executed to seize his computer equipment as proof.

Here is a PDF hosted by wired.com that consolidates a lot of this info.