3 ms·

Is there any 'legal' way to get around sharing a password if asked to? I'm thinking either a rotating password that you learn only when you need to access a de

Is there any 'legal' way to get around sharing a password if asked to? I'm thinking either a rotating password that you learn only when you need to access a device/file that is on a separate device that you store somewhere else. Or we take a leaf out of nuclear launch keys and two people have part of the password- if any of this is remotely different- obligatory IANAL

SturgeonsLaw 3y ago
They'll just imprison you until you unlock the device (or for up to 5 years, if you'd prefer to just wait it out)
- zardo 3y ago
  Is that per password?
- BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 3y ago
  If you are involved in causes frowned upon by the government of the country you are about to enter, you may want to wipe your phone on the plane. It's more difficult for three letter agencies if you fill the memory with random stuff and encrypt before wiping. If you don't want your phone used in impersonation while out of your hands, adb shell can be used to take out IMEI, BT and WiFi. Simpler to just swap mainboards - available on Alixxxx
stef25 3y ago
VeraCrypt has a plausible deniability feature. May not be tight enough for the NSA but could work for some glorified traffic cops at the airport.
- kbelder 3y ago
  To expand on that, the idea is that a password-protected encrypted volume may have, in its empty space, another password-protected volume, which is indistinguishable from random noise. You can't tell whether it exists or not. Inside that could be another one, and so on. At least that's the theory, I haven't messed with it to see.
acdha 3y ago
This is a legal problem, not a technical one. If you’re required to turn something over your choice is to do it or sit in jail (or worse if you get the full NYPD/Gitmo treatment). If you’re really lucky, you can convince them that whatever they’re looking for doesn’t exist but consider how hard it is to prove a negative like that. In most cases, that devolves to the second outcome above, possibly with some destruction of evidence charge.
- jjgreen 3y ago
  This is a technical problem, not a legal one. Don't take your phone.
  - acdha 3y ago
    That’s a misattribution. Not bringing your phone means you are choosing not to do something perfectly legal due to abuse of power — and doing so is likely to encourage further abuse because the culprits know they are less likely to be recorded.
    - jjgreen 3y ago
      I'd disagree, you taking your phone through customs is indeed legal, and the border goon's seizure of your phone (by force if they prefer) and demand for your password on penalty of imprisonment is also legal. So this is not a legal issue, everyone is acting within the law. One could argue that it is a political issue, that the law should be changed (and I'd agree), but that's a different question.
      - acdha 3y ago
        That’s the point: there are multiple laws involved, court cases trying to establish where things like rights to privacy end, etc. – none of those are technical issues.

SturgeonsLaw 3y ago

They'll just imprison you until you unlock the device (or for up to 5 years, if you'd prefer to just wait it out)

zardo 3y ago
Is that per password?
BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 3y ago
If you are involved in causes frowned upon by the government of the country you are about to enter, you may want to wipe your phone on the plane. It's more difficult for three letter agencies if you fill the memory with random stuff and encrypt before wiping. If you don't want your phone used in impersonation while out of your hands, adb shell can be used to take out IMEI, BT and WiFi. Simpler to just swap mainboards - available on Alixxxx

stef25 3y ago

VeraCrypt has a plausible deniability feature. May not be tight enough for the NSA but could work for some glorified traffic cops at the airport.

kbelder 3y ago
To expand on that, the idea is that a password-protected encrypted volume may have, in its empty space, another password-protected volume, which is indistinguishable from random noise. You can't tell whether it exists or not. Inside that could be another one, and so on. At least that's the theory, I haven't messed with it to see.

acdha 3y ago

This is a legal problem, not a technical one. If you’re required to turn something over your choice is to do it or sit in jail (or worse if you get the full NYPD/Gitmo treatment). If you’re really lucky, you can convince them that whatever they’re looking for doesn’t exist but consider how hard it is to prove a negative like that. In most cases, that devolves to the second outcome above, possibly with some destruction of evidence charge.

jjgreen 3y ago
This is a technical problem, not a legal one. Don't take your phone.
- acdha 3y ago
  That’s a misattribution. Not bringing your phone means you are choosing not to do something perfectly legal due to abuse of power — and doing so is likely to encourage further abuse because the culprits know they are less likely to be recorded.
  - jjgreen 3y ago
    I'd disagree, you taking your phone through customs is indeed legal, and the border goon's seizure of your phone (by force if they prefer) and demand for your password on penalty of imprisonment is also legal. So this is not a legal issue, everyone is acting within the law. One could argue that it is a political issue, that the law should be changed (and I'd agree), but that's a different question.
    - acdha 3y ago
      That’s the point: there are multiple laws involved, court cases trying to establish where things like rights to privacy end, etc. – none of those are technical issues.