4 ms·
This seems obvious to me. Why is it up for debate?
by tlrobinson 15y ago
This seems obvious to me. Why is it up for debate?
- bpd1069 15y agoUntil there is a law on the books or a judicial precedent it's debatable. The state/prosecution understands this process and will move forward until the above debate is settled. I understand it as providing your passphrase/word is providing what you 'know', one of the three tiers of authentication. This in it self is testimony.
- ams6110 15y agoThe counter argument is that the encrypted hard drive is like a locked filing cabinet in your house, which can be searched if a proper warrant is obtained.
- cft 15y agoDo you need to provide a key for a locked filing cabinet to the authorities though? They are free to break the lock with a proper warrant.
- karzeem 15y agoYou don't need to provide the key, just access to the contents. Or they can break the lock. But an encrypted drive is like an unbreakable lock.
- tlrobinson 15y agoIf you had an uncrackable safe could they compel you to open it though?
- karzeem 15y agoYes. They can't compel you to give them the means to open it (e.g. tell them the combination), but you can be forced to open it for them.
- jdhopeunique 15y agoOne could also say an encrypted hard drive is like the GPS location of a coffin containing a dead body. Can the authorities compel you to reveal the GPS coordinates of the body? If you deny any knowledge or reveal that you "forgot" the coordinates, could you be compelled to provide access to the evidence? What about GPS coordinates to a stash of drugs? At what point does revealing incriminating information become protected by the 5th amendment?