5 ms·

It seems like a bad idea to store anything incriminating on your local hard drive. Why not keep your encrypted files on a flash drive? If the police show up des

It seems like a bad idea to store anything incriminating on your local hard drive. Why not keep your encrypted files on a flash drive? If the police show up destroy the flash drive using a hammer, ensuring that the flash memory chip is thoroughly pulverized and completely unreadable. Likewise, if you are going to be using the internet for devious purposes drive around and use a neighbor's open wireless network access point, which highly reduces the chances that anything can be traced back to you. Or set up your own unsecured wireless network point and suggest to officers that illegal use came from an outside source. Not that I want to condone illegal activities, or condone lying to police officers, but to the hacker in me these seem like simple, sensible steps to take that will be more dependable than even a 50 character password.

tjarratt 16y ago
I understand that in some areas, not only is it illegal to operate an insecure wireless access point (in the UK at least), you can be held accountable for the actions of people that use the access point.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- Delts 16y ago
  Unless I'm mistaken you can currently still operate an unsecured access point in the UK. The legislation was originally part of the Digital Economy Act however I can't spot anything expressly forbidding operating one.
- sswam 16y ago
  that's amusing, considering that every wireless access point is insecure
  - elai 16y ago
    WPA2 with authentication or WPA2 with a 64-character line-noise password?
boredguy8 16y ago
Intentionally destroying incriminating evidence is probably not something you should ever do. Certainly not in such a way that leaves evidence in the form of pulverized IC remains all over your kitchen counter.
- NathanKP 16y ago
  Good point, I didn't think of that. Obviously I'm not a master criminal.
- ciupicri 16y ago
  But how can they prove that it was incriminating evidence?
  - anthonyb 16y ago
    Usually there'll be a reason for the police to kick your door down. I imagine that plus destroyed evidence would be enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
    - anthonyb 16y ago
      Also, I don't think it necessarily needs to be proven that the evidence was incriminating; just destroying evidence is criminal behavior. Of course, IANAL, but that's how I'd do it if I ruled the world...
      - loewenskind 16y ago
        How do you know it was evidence or related to the bust?
        anthonyb 16y ago
        There might be all sorts of reasons - if you're being busted for fraud or tax evasion and all of your hard drives are mysteriously blank, or there are empty filing cabinets and a big pile of ash then I would imagine that would go down fairly badly in court. The modern equivalent is a whole bunch of destroyed media - thumb drives, flash cards or hard drives.
lhnn 16y ago
My understanding is that the "oops Agent Smith, my WiFi was unsecured" is not legally feasible, or is going away.. you are responsible for access to your pipe. Which sucks... heh.
- jrockway 16y ago
  Where did you get this idea from?
  - Vivtek 16y ago
    I got this idea from the MPAA telling my ISP to tell me to secure my WiFi or lose my connectivity.
    - jrockway 16y ago
      The MPAA telling you that is no different than me telling you that. I have no legal authority to do so, no matter how many lawyer's names appear on my letterhead.
- NathanKP 16y ago
  That doesn't sound feasible to me, because there are so many older people and non-technically savy individuals who don't know how to secure their wireless access point. In addition, some models don't support security that is strong enough to prevent hacking, or they are set up using default or easy to guess passwords. Lastly, many wireless points are deliberately left open so that they can be used by customers of cafes, etc. So in summary, I seriously doubt that you can be held responsible for another person's use of your pipe.
lukev 16y ago
Yes, of course any smart criminals will do that. But my goal is not to be a smart criminal. My goal is to have a right to privacy to my own stuff. That said, I don't see why the well-established precedents of opening locked doors and safes shouldn't apply to computers. If you subpoena my safe, I have to open it for you. Otherwise, I certainly won't.
njharman 16y ago
> disposing of evidence Authorities are very aware of this. One reason for "raids", no knock warrants, arresting you on the road, at work, away from home, etc.
ciupicri 16y ago
I don't think that a flash drive would have been enough in his case. Maybe he had lots of pornographic pictures or videos with children.
Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
That doesn't cover you for swap files / hibernate files or memory dumps which are written unencrypted and largely outside your control. Obviously it's hit or miss what may or may not be included in there but there are a fair number of leaks where even "secure" information is handled in an insecure fashion. The TrueCrypt section on data leaks (http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/data-leaks http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/data-leaks) talks about them and how to get round them. But if you're really serious about these things it's more complex than not storing things on your local drive or even using encryption.

tjarratt 16y ago

I understand that in some areas, not only is it illegal to operate an insecure wireless access point (in the UK at least), you can be held accountable for the actions of people that use the access point.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Delts 16y ago
Unless I'm mistaken you can currently still operate an unsecured access point in the UK. The legislation was originally part of the Digital Economy Act however I can't spot anything expressly forbidding operating one.
sswam 16y ago
that's amusing, considering that every wireless access point is insecure
- elai 16y ago
  WPA2 with authentication or WPA2 with a 64-character line-noise password?

boredguy8 16y ago

Intentionally destroying incriminating evidence is probably not something you should ever do. Certainly not in such a way that leaves evidence in the form of pulverized IC remains all over your kitchen counter.

NathanKP 16y ago
Good point, I didn't think of that. Obviously I'm not a master criminal.
ciupicri 16y ago
But how can they prove that it was incriminating evidence?
- anthonyb 16y ago
  Usually there'll be a reason for the police to kick your door down. I imagine that plus destroyed evidence would be enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
  - anthonyb 16y ago
    Also, I don't think it necessarily needs to be proven that the evidence was incriminating; just destroying evidence is criminal behavior. Of course, IANAL, but that's how I'd do it if I ruled the world...
    - loewenskind 16y ago
      How do you know it was evidence or related to the bust?
      - anthonyb 16y ago
        There might be all sorts of reasons - if you're being busted for fraud or tax evasion and all of your hard drives are mysteriously blank, or there are empty filing cabinets and a big pile of ash then I would imagine that would go down fairly badly in court. The modern equivalent is a whole bunch of destroyed media - thumb drives, flash cards or hard drives.

lhnn 16y ago

My understanding is that the "oops Agent Smith, my WiFi was unsecured" is not legally feasible, or is going away.. you are responsible for access to your pipe. Which sucks... heh.

jrockway 16y ago
Where did you get this idea from?
- Vivtek 16y ago
  I got this idea from the MPAA telling my ISP to tell me to secure my WiFi or lose my connectivity.
  - jrockway 16y ago
    The MPAA telling you that is no different than me telling you that. I have no legal authority to do so, no matter how many lawyer's names appear on my letterhead.
NathanKP 16y ago
That doesn't sound feasible to me, because there are so many older people and non-technically savy individuals who don't know how to secure their wireless access point. In addition, some models don't support security that is strong enough to prevent hacking, or they are set up using default or easy to guess passwords. Lastly, many wireless points are deliberately left open so that they can be used by customers of cafes, etc. So in summary, I seriously doubt that you can be held responsible for another person's use of your pipe.

lukev 16y ago

Yes, of course any smart criminals will do that. But my goal is not to be a smart criminal. My goal is to have a right to privacy to my own stuff. That said, I don't see why the well-established precedents of opening locked doors and safes shouldn't apply to computers. If you subpoena my safe, I have to open it for you. Otherwise, I certainly won't.

njharman 16y ago

> disposing of evidence Authorities are very aware of this. One reason for "raids", no knock warrants, arresting you on the road, at work, away from home, etc.

ciupicri 16y ago

I don't think that a flash drive would have been enough in his case. Maybe he had lots of pornographic pictures or videos with children.

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago

That doesn't cover you for swap files / hibernate files or memory dumps which are written unencrypted and largely outside your control. Obviously it's hit or miss what may or may not be included in there but there are a fair number of leaks where even "secure" information is handled in an insecure fashion. The TrueCrypt section on data leaks (http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/data-leaks http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/data-leaks) talks about them and how to get round them. But if you're really serious about these things it's more complex than not storing things on your local drive or even using encryption.