4 ms·

Would it be possible to construct a file/system encryption scheme where you have a read-write passcode and a read-only passcode? Such that when given the read-o

by 19870213 4y ago

Would it be possible to construct a file/system encryption scheme where you have a read-write passcode and a read-only passcode? Such that when given the read-only passcode it would allow (legal/valid) searches by law enforcement, but not (easily) allow fabrication of evidence by planting incriminating files? I suppose you could make it part of a signature scheme for files (file written by passcode X) so that your defense could point to the discrepancy in your favour.

m00x 4y ago
Any backdoor made for law enforcement will eventually land in the hands of bad actors, and sometimes those backdoors will be used illegally by law enforcement.
- oh_my_goodness 4y ago
  The proposal is kind of the opposite. It's a restricted mode intended for use by law enforcement.
  - hnuser123456 4y ago
    It's a practical feature in general, to allow anyone to poke through your phone without installing/posting/reconfiguring anything, occasionally nice to have. Then again, it would also slightly increase the social normalcy of being able to ask to snoop through other people's phones.
    - asvitkine 4y ago
      So they can use the banking app to transfer money away from your account because that's not stored locally on your phone? Or to look at your private photos?
      - halper 4y ago
        Surely even banks/countries that do not have a stronger auth method require at least a password for login?
- feet 4y ago
  I think they mean two separate passcodes set by the user, same as a normal passcode
HPsquared 4y ago
Probably something involving digital signatures on all files.
megous 4y ago
And what proves you didn't introduce the discrepancy yourself? (Since you'd benefit from it, it's quite plausible you would.)
ranguna 4y ago
If you mount an decrypted file system from another user, doesn't that make it inheritly read only if you are not a super user?
bheadmaster 4y ago
Public key encryption perhaps? Private key for encryption, public key for decryption. You give the authorities the public key, they can't plant any data with it.

m00x 4y ago

Any backdoor made for law enforcement will eventually land in the hands of bad actors, and sometimes those backdoors will be used illegally by law enforcement.

oh_my_goodness 4y ago
The proposal is kind of the opposite. It's a restricted mode intended for use by law enforcement.
- hnuser123456 4y ago
  It's a practical feature in general, to allow anyone to poke through your phone without installing/posting/reconfiguring anything, occasionally nice to have. Then again, it would also slightly increase the social normalcy of being able to ask to snoop through other people's phones.
  - asvitkine 4y ago
    So they can use the banking app to transfer money away from your account because that's not stored locally on your phone? Or to look at your private photos?
    - halper 4y ago
      Surely even banks/countries that do not have a stronger auth method require at least a password for login?
feet 4y ago
I think they mean two separate passcodes set by the user, same as a normal passcode

HPsquared 4y ago

Probably something involving digital signatures on all files.

megous 4y ago

And what proves you didn't introduce the discrepancy yourself? (Since you'd benefit from it, it's quite plausible you would.)

ranguna 4y ago

If you mount an decrypted file system from another user, doesn't that make it inheritly read only if you are not a super user?

bheadmaster 4y ago

Public key encryption perhaps? Private key for encryption, public key for decryption. You give the authorities the public key, they can't plant any data with it.