5 ms·
The private keys are usually encrypted, so the attacker would have to brute force the password, install a keylogger or use a wrench, to give some ideas.
by fidelramos 5y ago
The private keys are usually encrypted, so the attacker would have to brute force the password, install a keylogger or use a wrench, to give some ideas.
- toyg 5y agoyour weekly friendly reminder that refusing to hand off passwords to authorities is a crime in the UK, punishable with up to 2 years in prison (5 if the case is marked as sensitive for "national security"). That's a pretty nice wrench.
- gccs 5y agoI forgot my password.
- NationalPark 5y agoJudges love arguments like this.
- Corristowolf 5y agoJudges do or defense attorneys do?
- toyg 5y agoThis has been tested in court as a defense. Try to guess what the result was.
- hrjfkfnf 5y agoNot sure if that applies to a password used to secure crypto, since you can argue that the gov can see what's behind the password (ie: the crypto amount), and the purpose of the law is to reveal data hidden by the password, not to take control over it.
- toyg 5y agoThe "legitimate interests" clause is broad enough that it can probably be bent for that, but I reckon it would boil down to the interpretation of the "no signatures" clause: > (9) A notice under this section shall not require the disclosure of any key which- > (a) is intended to be used for the purpose only of generating electronic signatures; and > (b) has not in fact been used for any other purpose. I'm not versed in bitcoin enough to judge if wallet data protected by that password is used only for signing. This clause seems largely meant to avoid the possibility that authorities will impersonate a user after forcing him to hand over his key.
- yrro 5y agoInfo about the relevant law: https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000/Part_III https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investig...