4 ms·

I understand this, I mean that they don't know how many layers of misdirection are actually involved, you can provide n fake layers of encryption with trivially

I understand this, I mean that they don't know how many layers of misdirection are actually involved, you can provide n fake layers of encryption with trivially incriminating information, as long as the "free space" of the volume in question contains randomised data, they can never know if it is actually an encrypted volume one level deeper or not.

koenigdavidmj 15y ago
rdtsc's point is that you are assuming that the system will play by their own rules. Not necessarily the case, especially when the entire weight of public opinion is against you.
- etherael 15y ago
  My point is that I understand that, I'm not expecting the system restrict itself in any way shape or form, this is par for the course in many places around the world where no quarter can be expected from the authorities. They can't continue to compel you for more and more passphrases for more and more encrypted shadow volumes that they're not even aware actually exist, this is what it eventually reduces down to.
  - merijnv 15y ago
    > They can't continue to compel you for more and more passphrases for more and more encrypted shadow volumes that they're not even aware actually exist The point is, they can. If you're in some place run by a dictator they can do whatever the hell they want to you, including torturing you until you die.
    - etherael 15y ago
      Sure, but it's tactically useless, as they can't know if they're just applying useless pressure because they don't know how many layers of shadow volumes there are to penetrate. So yes, they can be pricks, but to no discernible effect.
      - koenigdavidmj 15y ago
        >So yes, they can be pricks, but to no discernible effect. They won't get more data, but they will send a clear signal to other users of this stuff to behave themselves.
        etherael 15y ago
        People in power have never been short on excuses for abuses thereof, this aspect of this issue is just another in a huge ocean of existing valid and arbitrary ones.

koenigdavidmj 15y ago

rdtsc's point is that you are assuming that the system will play by their own rules. Not necessarily the case, especially when the entire weight of public opinion is against you.

etherael 15y ago
My point is that I understand that, I'm not expecting the system restrict itself in any way shape or form, this is par for the course in many places around the world where no quarter can be expected from the authorities. They can't continue to compel you for more and more passphrases for more and more encrypted shadow volumes that they're not even aware actually exist, this is what it eventually reduces down to.
- merijnv 15y ago
  > They can't continue to compel you for more and more passphrases for more and more encrypted shadow volumes that they're not even aware actually exist The point is, they can. If you're in some place run by a dictator they can do whatever the hell they want to you, including torturing you until you die.
  - etherael 15y ago
    Sure, but it's tactically useless, as they can't know if they're just applying useless pressure because they don't know how many layers of shadow volumes there are to penetrate. So yes, they can be pricks, but to no discernible effect.
    - koenigdavidmj 15y ago
      >So yes, they can be pricks, but to no discernible effect. They won't get more data, but they will send a clear signal to other users of this stuff to behave themselves.
      - etherael 15y ago
        People in power have never been short on excuses for abuses thereof, this aspect of this issue is just another in a huge ocean of existing valid and arbitrary ones.