Live in USA

>live in USA
>have encrypted hard drives
>be suspected of a crime
>detained in custody indefinitely for not divulging the password/key
>muh plausible deniability

Good luck thinking your hardened arch install will make any difference.

bbc.com/news/technology-39339408

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption
embeddedsw.net/doc/physical_coercion.txt
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/man-jailed-indefinitely-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives-loses-appeal/
webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PMhaKUR0fWsJ:https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Chris_Forcand &cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Looks like the Yanks have finally caught up with glorious british law which made not giving up encryption keys a crime.
At least it wasn't indefinite detention though.

The system is fucked. In the UK, having sex with someone underage in some cases can get you less time in jail than refusing to give out a password. I know some muslim pedo gangs have since been released after only serving a year or so in prison Bare in mind 2D loli is illegal to possess in the UK so spergy weebs are getting locked up unfairly.

"Thing is now illegal. Do as we say or else we will put you in a box."
Authoritarian government is only a few steps from a tyrannical government.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption

Hope you have a high pain tolerance.

embeddedsw.net/doc/physical_coercion.txt

If you're getting tortured you're dead anyway, hope that disk didn't mean anything to anyone.

>fuck around with encryption
>have old encrypted hard drives laying around with no clue what the passphrase was
>get v&
>be fucked

thats why you have two passwords for a single encrypted volume silly bun hun

>ok now tell us the hidden volume password
>don't have one? any loser could claim that
>jerry get my "dental" kit ready

>no proof
>no criminal charges
>locked away for 18 months and counting
Truly the land of the free

Kek no good to be white anymore in the US

>unfairly

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/man-jailed-indefinitely-for-refusing-to-decrypt-hard-drives-loses-appeal/
>On Monday, a US federal appeals court sided against a former Philadelphia police officer who has been in jail 17 months because he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. He had refused to comply with a court order commanding him to unlock two hard drives the authorities say contain child porn.

>In deciding against Rawls, the court of appeals found that the constitutional rights against being compelled to testify against oneself were not being breached. That's because the appeals court, like the police, agreed that the presence of child porn on his drives was a "foregone conclusion." The Fifth Amendment, at its most basic level, protects suspects from being forced to disclose incriminating evidence. In this instance, however, the authorities said they already know there's child porn on the drives, so Rawls' constitutional rights aren't compromised.
>The court also noted that the authorities "found [on the Mac Book Pro] one image depicting a pubescent girl in a sexually suggestive position and logs that suggested the user had visited groups with titles common in child exploitation." They also said the man's sister had "reported" that her brother showed her hundreds of pictures and videos of child pornography. All of this, according to the appeals court, meant that the lower court lawfully ordered Rawls to unlock the drives.

But what if you actually forgot the password?

>nuffin to hide

Somebody should link you previous thread, also, read the complaint.
"Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Magistrate Judge found that Doe remembered the passwords needed to decrypt the hard drives but chose not to reveal them because of the devices’ contents."

> Removing weebs from society

So what was your problem again?

>the authorities said they already know there's child porn on the drives
Then why unlock it in the first place?

If it isn't a breach of the constitutional rights, he wouldn't have to unlock it.

Or you should stop being a pedo

>the Magistrate Judge found
Well I find a lot of things, too.

>We have a feeling there's child porn on there
>We have a feeling he knows the password
Some tippy-top evidence they have there, completely justifies keeping a man locked up

Lurking Freenet and having encrypted drive makes you a pedo, huh?

We had this thread just yesterday..

It's not only an encrypted harddrive:
-IP logs that show that he downloaded CP
-at least one "sexual" picture of a minor
-the hash keys of the files are identical to certain CP pics
-his own sister accused him of downloading CP


So it's more like somebody was shot and somebody saw the shooter, but the shooter put the gun into a safe and refuses to open it because he knows that it was the weapon in question.

Moreover I see no reason to defend him, he's obviously a pedo and back in the days Sup Forums was busting pedos IIRC. If he would get away with this "LEL, can't touch me, I encrypted my disc xD" shit, more pedos (and their lawyers) would get encouraged to just keep things locked.

>Moreover I see no reason to defend him
t. somebody talking about you after a con job putting you in jail

>back in the days Sup Forums was busting pedos IIRC

No, you don't recall correctly. Pedo shaming is a relative new thing on Sup Forums. I have no idea were you got this from.

>-IP logs that show that he downloaded CP
-at least one "sexual" picture of a minor
>-the hash keys of the files are identical to certain CP pics
-his own sister accused him of downloading CP

If he had Wifi, these could be easily tossed out.

>back in the days
>I have no idea were you got this from.
he's obviously new.

You're wrong m8 and you're from reddit so stop with the reddit double return key formatting because 4chin handles paragraphs perfectly.
>reddit faggit

Sup Forums history:
>Sup Forums was guro
>Sup Forums founded the pedobear meme
>cp posting was rampant in /l/oli board including zoophilia
>only zoophilia got attention because animal rightists
>4chin attacks church of scientology which pushes DMCA
>anons lost
>somewhere around 2008 IIRC birth of DMCA and laws banning cp
>cp posting went for so long, true anomalous could use VPN and proxy and never get v&
>botnet captcha introduced, destruction of /l/oli and VPN/proxies IP b&

This wasn't a site meant for normies so goBackto(reditt);

>Bare in mind 2D loli is illegal to possess in the UK
[citation needed]

If so, many UK Sup Forumsnons are in deep shit

Wasn't Sup Forums loli?

>foregone conclusion
>if you refuse to confess, we'll imprison you indefinitely until you do
>THEN you can get sentenced

Can't you like put a second password in it that activates some stupid function that deletes directories?

>people possessing child pornography are being locked up unfairly

>accused equals guilty
>pedos do something therefore we should take rights away from everyone

>-at least one "sexual" picture of a minor
>And a lot of circumstantial evidence
Now everyone that's clicked on this thread has a "sexual" thumbnail of a minor. Enjoy you're are v&.

>this is a good thing
Hey, we found this hard drive. It doesn't have any data that we can prove is on there, but we're going to claim it's an encrypted drive, and you're going to give the key to us or we're going to keep you in prison. That's very convenient for us, seeing as how you're a political enemy of the state, but that's only secondary to your crime of keeping this CLEARLY encrypted drive.

IP logs show that someone using the same IP as him downloaded CP via his network.

He apparently had suggestive images of an underage relative - that's irrelevant to why he's being held and his appeal is being denied, though.

If the files are encrypted, their hashes are not identical to known CP. This is just the first argument reiterated, and adds nothing. You're just parroting.

It's more like someone was shot dead, and there is only one person in town who possesses a gun illegally. There's no reason not to prosecute them for what we know (the accusations regarding the relative) but there's no reason to prosecute him for what we don't know (that his hard drive is encrypted; that'd be like assuming he shot the victim, when nobody can prove or disprove his whereabouts or tie him to the crime otherwise. It could, in that analogy, have been someone who passed through town who shot and killed the victim)

It seems obvious to you that he has CP (despite there being no binding proof), but if we violate due process, you better fucking believe things go downhill quick. I mean, do you enjoy having your money stolen from you from cops due to civil forfeiture? Because that's a violation of due process, and it happens all the fucking time. It's systematic.

but you are the distributor. im sure that the feds would go after you first.

The FBI also distribute the pizza, remember? We know whose side they will be on.

If someone wants to shoot your doggo, it doesn't matter.

That face

>I seriously hope you arent a pedo

>due process should not be applied fairly to everyone.
>i get to cherry pick how the law gets applied and who it applies to.

It makes sense. How long he spends sitting in jail waiting to give up the keys shows just had bad the things he's trying to hide are. If he has nothing to hide he'll give up the keys and will be on his way but seeing as how he hasn't, he deserves to be locked up for whatever he is hiding.

Reading the article, they had reason to believe there is actually CP after they decrypted his mac, probably from some sort of recent files or other shit that leaks stuff from volumes

>hardened arch

>If he has nothing to hide he'll give up the keys and will be on his way

This argument is wrong too.

>police knock on door
>can we come in?
no
>hiding something then? because you would let us in if you had nothing to hide

YOU would say no because YOU have something to hide. If an officer knocked on my door I'd let him in.

You understand that what is illegal is possession of those files, right?

If he possessed them, then deleted them, he is not in breach of the law.

Exercising your rights is a good thing, keeps them in shape.
>Hello officers, nothing's going on in here I'm perfectly safe with all my guns and privacy thank you. Please get off my property now, I'm sure you know the relevant tresspass legislation.

Not like I like the situation, but given how the better your lawyer, the better you'll be off in court in the US, I'm not surprised.

Okay. The police enter your apartment, conclude that you have a lot of expensive things lying around and they let you know that they're going to seize some of your property through civil forfeiture as there's a possibility that you gained those assets through illegal activity.

This is something that happens, and happens a lot - like with the family that had their car seized when a mechanic drove it while testing the repairs he had done with an expired drivers license.

Or,
>Hello officer, thanks for enforcing the law and keeping the neighborhood safe from child predators, sure I'll let you in, can I get you a drink?

so then i guess you arent opposed to your government installing CCTV INSIDE every room in your house, recording all audio inside your house, logging all of your phone calls, logging all of your computer history, and having someone follow you around 24/7, because, you have nothing to hide, and therefore have nothing to fear from someone watching everything you do.
right?

Okay, what if a bunch of clowns came into your house and stole you dog and ate all your cereal? I can play the "what if" game too.

You're basically guaranteed to be guilty of violating some law, there's more than any human being can possibly comprehend at this point. If they want you arrested, you're arrested.

That means you'll be giving them full permission to turn your house upside down, possibly plant drugs or basically place yourself under the full mercy of the law or corrupt police, for no apparent reason...
why do faggots like you shitpost and ruin imageboards? do you think you're funny or original? or are you so hungry for attention and validation that you would go out of your way to ruin things like a cancer on an anonymous imageboard? kill yourself

This.

it is very common that anything (ESPECIALLY CASH) of value are seized by the police who then make it prohibitively expensive to retrieve said items.

What so you don't want the police checking your computer for illegal files? So you'd be okay with roaming gangs of anarchists on trucks with machine guns firing into people's homes? I mean, you don't want any laws right?

HURRRRRRRRRRR

Then i would have a bunch of dead clowns in my house as i would be protected under the castle doctrine.

It is in the legislation. Any drawn/pseudo image depicting a child in a sexualised manner is prohibited.

Show me some documented cases of this happening while I compile a list of when just a few of the many, many unjust civil forfiture cases.

>letting random people into your apartment
Shiggy diggy cucks something something

Seriously though, if you do that, you deserve the assrape that follows. Both figuratively, and quite possibly, literaly.

webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PMhaKUR0fWsJ:https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Chris_Forcand &cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Fuck off cancer

absolutely, you fucking degenerate massive fag

How do you erase the history of any file you deleted on your hard drive? Or that you actually downloaded something or moved it. Are there log files that say x file was here and it was moved to y?

Can you just remove the file, clear all caches and erase all free space?

So why dont you tell them the password?
You can reencrypt with a new one after you are cleared.

How do you prove that the drive is encrypted?

>How do you erase the history of any file you deleted on your hard drive?

you overwrite the sector of the drive the deleted file sat on.

HDDs dont actually delete a file when you tell it to. it just marks that sector as available for a write when the system gets around to needing it. Which is why file recovery is a thing.

I know about that. I was wondering if information about the file's existance is stored somewhere by the file manager or web browser.

Everybody knows people keep around volumes or files of random data for reasons, right?

Do you believe courts are made of 1960s scifi computers?

More like the suspect would have to prove the random bits filled drive has other purpose if he wants to claim it isn't. Also you can probably look at hi OS install and see he has the apps/components for this installed.

what anime is this?

Crusher Joe OVA.

>"The government has provided evidence to show both that files exist on the encrypted portions of the devices and that [the suspect] can access them," wrote the circuit judges, rejecting the appeal.

>files
That's not an encrypted drive then, user. Please don't talk about things you don't understand, it shows how retarded you are.

Have you never had a hard drive fail? Have you ever disposed of an old hard drive?

Oh, they have? Did they show him accessing it in court?

Government claims to know plaintext on encrypted drive. They're still urging the defendant to provide decryption keys. Nobody seeing the issue with this?

I do. If they know those files are there, they can prove it. If they can prove it, they don't need the password.
They have no real proof and, basically, they are trying to extort the evidence.

Easy. Every encrypted file/device contains a cryptoheader, otherwise it would be impossible to determine a right decryption algorithm, or where the data actually starts. If you have a header, you have a proof it's encrypted and you may even tell the software.

What about pulling ISP logs? Can't they prove that someone at the address downloaded them and then extrapolate that it was his machine? Motherfucker was using a mac he obviously wasn't very smart. That and his melanin levels

> Can't they prove that someone at the address downloaded them and then extrapolate that it was his machine?
Well, kinda, but he always can say "I don't know who did that, I have an open wi-fi hotspot/some relatives/a virus/whatever". MAC address can be cloned, so it's not a solid evidence.
> Motherfucker was using a mac he obviously wasn't very smart.
Well, he still encrypted his drives.

Downloading cp is not illegal. You've probably seen cp on this site at some point in your life, and you are not a criminal because of it. What would make you a criminal is storing that data on your hard drive, manually, meaning that you are in possession of it.

Someone was freed for having such data in their browser cache, as it could not be proven that it was their intent to store cp.

I've already explained this. The charge is POSSESSION of cp.

>Have you never had a hard drive fail? Have you ever disposed of an old hard drive?
Failed drive won't look like random data, and it is trivial if drive is actually failed. Speaking about who doesn't know shit.

I mentioned files because last time I was interested in truecrypt for hiding porn from parents, it could be used in disk or in file/image mode.

>Don't worry, Trump won't let it happen to you! He cares about privacy and your rights!

Well you see the only reason they caught him was because of his ISP logs. They would of had to contact them for his information to be given over so they know exactly where he lives.

This guy needs a better lawyer

No, this country needs better privacy

Well that too

>implying he won't eventually win on further appeals.

Correction:? it is trivial to check if drive is actually failed

it's GOP, dude. They only care about big business and rich people who want to pay little to no taxes (like Trump himself).

Are all millennials this stupid?

> Ad hominem
You lost the argument, m8.

>-IP logs that show that he downloaded
he was using i2p you retards. It's like being a tor node.

Anyway this is an interesting case because the guy is
a) a cop
b) at trial for CP
he knows that if he relents it's a death sentence, my guess is he will continue to sit in jail forever rather than comply

> he was using i2p you retards
How he got caught then? Is I2P compromised?

>not storing the binary code for pizza in your head

What a scrub.

In all honesty, losing a case in an appeals court just means that it has a chance to be heard by the supreme court, and applied across the entirety of the country. I can only hope that the supreme court will be more reasonable about the 5th amendment. The arguments that have been made thus far by courts are pretty fucking retarded? It's a foregone conclusion that there is damning evidence on the phone? Then you do not need access to it. If the prosecutors have enough evidence already to say they know for certain what is on it, and that the defendant's testimony would make no difference, then they should use that evidence to convict him. If, however, a reasonable argument can be made that they do not have enough evidence to convict him, and need to decrypt the phone, then the defendant's fifth amendment rights must come into play. Under no circumstances should the defendant be required to provide evidence that would swing the result of their own trial against them.

Funny, here in Germany it's the other way around. Having cp in a cache counts as downloading it, but there is no prison for not telling passwords.

That's not an ad hominem. You're just being insulted for stupidity.

> legitimate, relevant concern
Nope, can't see it there.

PROTIP: if you live in US/UK, don't wipe your old drives by overwriting them with random data; you might be thrown in fucking jail for not being able to "decrypt" that highly suspicious shit.

>what is dm-crypt plain mode

This. Isn't destruction of evidence, even if it's only presumed to be evidence, a potentially worse crime?