5 ms·

That's not a slippery slope. That's a cliff. If all it takes is a forensic experts "guess" that there might child porn on there somewhere to access everything y

That's not a slippery slope. That's a cliff. If all it takes is a forensic experts "guess" that there might child porn on there somewhere to access everything you've got without even filing charges then kiddie-porn is just the quick way to say that the 5th has been repealed.

pbiggar 11y ago
If ever there was a indictment of the quality of forensic evidence, this would be it. The expert "guessed" the contents of the encrypted drive? With what, magic? Did the arrangement of the encrypted content hint at the presence of child pornography? Actually surprised that arstechnica didn't call this out - maybe they knew their audience was sufficiently technical to get the implication.
- physguy1123 11y ago
  There are plenty of reasons one can guess the contents of the hard drive - but it's nothing more, just a guess. Could be useful for guiding a search for actual evidence. The real issue here is that the legal system is then treating this guess itself as a sort of actual evidence for jailing the suspect.
fweespee_ch 11y ago
Yep. I use encrypted drives for my financial information and other sensitive information I store on behalf of family (e.g. legal docs), etc. I wouldn't have a desire to reveal that either.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  In my world, there is no such thing as an "encrypted drive" in that no drive is ever not encrypted. Other than booting, there is no reason for data to be stored unencrypted. Whether it's full disk, home-directory, or volume-based encryption, nothing should be in plaintext. The only non-encrypted drive I need are thumbdrives for playing thing on my media player (WD). But I'd love to close that gap should anyone market a reasonable media player that can handle encrypted drives.
Integer 11y ago
Maybe some suggestive file names in the player's history?
joesmo 11y ago
As rare as actual child porn is, the government loves these cases because the defendant is considered guilty before even being arrested, certainly before he gets in front of a judge/jury and there's so much taboo around the issue that most people are unwilling to come to the aid of the defendant. Come to think of it, I could say the same thing about terrorism cases (which are even rarer). And yes, the message they're constantly sending is that pretty much the whole Bill of Rights has been repealed, not just the 5th.
- ljf 11y ago
  Sadly not as rare as you might think, plenty of cases each day, and few make the press. There are a lot of sick people out there.
  - threatofrain 11y ago
    It seems difficult to get any recent authoritative source on child porn incidence rates. What is the origin of your information? Has there been any academic discussion on the incidence rates of child porn?
    - tehwebguy 11y ago
      Like anyone feels safe even searching for stats like that anymore
    - ljf 11y ago
      Sorry no figures just I know someone that works i a court here in the UK and said there are regularly people in on child abuse imagery/video charges, they are usually some boring guy that no one cares about so they don't make the press.
    - ljf 11y ago
      Sorry no figures just I know someone that works i a court here in the UK and said there are regularly people in on child abuse imagery/video charges, they are usually some boring guy that no one cares about so they don't make the press.
Shivetya 11y ago
Yeah, this is very little difference here between the seizure laws enforcement uses to steal money from citizens. They can make any claim they want and you are forced to prove otherwise while they have no requirement to prove guilt
- fapjacks 11y ago
  "Civil Forfeiture" if anyone is curious what Shivetya means.
maxerickson 11y ago
The guess is slightly more compelling when considered together with the testimony of the sister that she viewed images of abuse on the computer. Like, the line of questioning could be, did you find any images on the computer, did you find any evidence of techniques used to obscure information on the computer, could the images that so and so observed be stored using those techniques. It isn't confirmation that the images are there, but it is more than guessing out of thin air that there might be images there.
- chillingeffect 11y ago
  So all I have to do is testify I saw images of abuse on my sister's computer and she can be jailed indefinitely? That's not just. That's a repressive police state. The burden of proof is on the accuser. The accused bears no burden of proof. This principle goes back almost 2,000 years, across multiple cultures, includes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, predates and includes the American culture as well. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
- luso_brazilian 11y ago
  The government doesn't have a case with that evidence alone, that's why they are trying to compel the defendant to decrypt the hard drive. Here is how that's an end run around the 5th amendment: > State: you are under arrest on suspicious of possession of child pornography. You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand your rights? > Defendant: yes > Witness: I saw what he has it in that computer > State: now reveal the password > Defendant: I invoke the right to remain silent. Have charges been pressed or am I free to go? > State: no charges pressed, you are detained until you reveal the password Here is how that could play differently in the future: > State: you are under arrest on suspicious of murder. You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand your rights? > Defendant: yes > Witness: I saw what he did to the victim > State: now reveal the whereabouts of the body > Defendant: I invoke the right to remain silent. Have charges been pressed or am I free to go? > State: no charges pressed, you are detained until you reveal it If the All Writs Act allows the government to do the first it also allow the government to do the second.
gusmd 11y ago
If I was the defendant's lawyer, I would ask the "forensic expert": > Given a (encrypted) file named "bank_account_password'.txt", can you guess its contents? Based on the current reasoning, the "expert" would say: > Yes! It contains the password to a bank account! The defendant could then "decrypt" the file and show that it was instead a JPEG picture of a bird. Case closed.

pbiggar 11y ago

If ever there was a indictment of the quality of forensic evidence, this would be it. The expert "guessed" the contents of the encrypted drive? With what, magic? Did the arrangement of the encrypted content hint at the presence of child pornography? Actually surprised that arstechnica didn't call this out - maybe they knew their audience was sufficiently technical to get the implication.

physguy1123 11y ago
There are plenty of reasons one can guess the contents of the hard drive - but it's nothing more, just a guess. Could be useful for guiding a search for actual evidence. The real issue here is that the legal system is then treating this guess itself as a sort of actual evidence for jailing the suspect.

fweespee_ch 11y ago

Yep. I use encrypted drives for my financial information and other sensitive information I store on behalf of family (e.g. legal docs), etc. I wouldn't have a desire to reveal that either.

sandworm101 11y ago
In my world, there is no such thing as an "encrypted drive" in that no drive is ever not encrypted. Other than booting, there is no reason for data to be stored unencrypted. Whether it's full disk, home-directory, or volume-based encryption, nothing should be in plaintext. The only non-encrypted drive I need are thumbdrives for playing thing on my media player (WD). But I'd love to close that gap should anyone market a reasonable media player that can handle encrypted drives.

Integer 11y ago

Maybe some suggestive file names in the player's history?

joesmo 11y ago

As rare as actual child porn is, the government loves these cases because the defendant is considered guilty before even being arrested, certainly before he gets in front of a judge/jury and there's so much taboo around the issue that most people are unwilling to come to the aid of the defendant. Come to think of it, I could say the same thing about terrorism cases (which are even rarer). And yes, the message they're constantly sending is that pretty much the whole Bill of Rights has been repealed, not just the 5th.

ljf 11y ago
Sadly not as rare as you might think, plenty of cases each day, and few make the press. There are a lot of sick people out there.
- threatofrain 11y ago
  It seems difficult to get any recent authoritative source on child porn incidence rates. What is the origin of your information? Has there been any academic discussion on the incidence rates of child porn?
  - tehwebguy 11y ago
    Like anyone feels safe even searching for stats like that anymore
  - ljf 11y ago
    Sorry no figures just I know someone that works i a court here in the UK and said there are regularly people in on child abuse imagery/video charges, they are usually some boring guy that no one cares about so they don't make the press.
  - ljf 11y ago
    Sorry no figures just I know someone that works i a court here in the UK and said there are regularly people in on child abuse imagery/video charges, they are usually some boring guy that no one cares about so they don't make the press.

Shivetya 11y ago

Yeah, this is very little difference here between the seizure laws enforcement uses to steal money from citizens. They can make any claim they want and you are forced to prove otherwise while they have no requirement to prove guilt

fapjacks 11y ago
"Civil Forfeiture" if anyone is curious what Shivetya means.

maxerickson 11y ago

The guess is slightly more compelling when considered together with the testimony of the sister that she viewed images of abuse on the computer. Like, the line of questioning could be, did you find any images on the computer, did you find any evidence of techniques used to obscure information on the computer, could the images that so and so observed be stored using those techniques. It isn't confirmation that the images are there, but it is more than guessing out of thin air that there might be images there.

chillingeffect 11y ago
So all I have to do is testify I saw images of abuse on my sister's computer and she can be jailed indefinitely? That's not just. That's a repressive police state. The burden of proof is on the accuser. The accused bears no burden of proof. This principle goes back almost 2,000 years, across multiple cultures, includes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, predates and includes the American culture as well. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
luso_brazilian 11y ago
The government doesn't have a case with that evidence alone, that's why they are trying to compel the defendant to decrypt the hard drive. Here is how that's an end run around the 5th amendment: > State: you are under arrest on suspicious of possession of child pornography. You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand your rights? > Defendant: yes > Witness: I saw what he has it in that computer > State: now reveal the password > Defendant: I invoke the right to remain silent. Have charges been pressed or am I free to go? > State: no charges pressed, you are detained until you reveal the password Here is how that could play differently in the future: > State: you are under arrest on suspicious of murder. You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand your rights? > Defendant: yes > Witness: I saw what he did to the victim > State: now reveal the whereabouts of the body > Defendant: I invoke the right to remain silent. Have charges been pressed or am I free to go? > State: no charges pressed, you are detained until you reveal it If the All Writs Act allows the government to do the first it also allow the government to do the second.

gusmd 11y ago

If I was the defendant's lawyer, I would ask the "forensic expert": > Given a (encrypted) file named "bank_account_password'.txt", can you guess its contents? Based on the current reasoning, the "expert" would say: > Yes! It contains the password to a bank account! The defendant could then "decrypt" the file and show that it was instead a JPEG picture of a bird. Case closed.