6 ms·

>> if you can prove it's not actually encrypted But that's the thing: you can't prove that. You're saying: "prove that there does not exist any decryption met

>> if you can prove it's not actually encrypted But that's the thing: you can't prove that. You're saying: "prove that there does not exist any decryption method or key that will turn this blob into incriminating data." You can never prove that such a decryption method doesn't exist. In fact, maybe it does exist? Given a blob of random data and infinite time, couldn't you find a way to "decrypt" that into pre-defined data? (I'm not really sure of that.)

adrianN 14y ago
You can decrypt random data to anything if you want to. Say R is your random data and M is the message you want. Compute Key=R+M, then decrypt R-Key=M.
- crusso 14y ago
  Assuming the encryption method can create the bit sequence that is the random data. It very well might not. There may be gaps in the encrypted data's number space. For any non-trivial encryption method, you'd be brute forcing your way through a bunch of them to find the key that can decrypt the random noise to that message. Typical "20 times longer than the existence of the universe" warnings apply. :)
  - jgeralnik 14y ago
    But the encryption method doesn't need to be non-trivial, especially when you define key as anything that (a)allows access to the electronic data, or (b)facilitates the putting of the data into an intelligible form;
    - crusso 14y ago
      So, if you have a meg of random data, you're thinking you could give them a one meg XOR key that decodes it to an MP3 file of "God Save the Queen"? Okay. :)
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- basseq 14y ago
  This argument is interesting because it both a) makes the law worthless and b) removes the "scary slippery slope" argument. After all, if you can provide a key to anything, then all you have to do (whether it's encrypted financial documents or random noise) is say, "Yep, it's encrypted, here's the key, it's the text of the Wikipedia page for 'kittens.'" Prove that's not the correct key. If the onus for producing a key (whether one exists or not) is on the defendant, isn't the onus for proving the validity of the decrypted file on the prosecution? All this comes back to cases like the one from CA (I think) where the guy who refused to decrypt the evidence that would prove his guilt. And from another perspective, if you're Bernie Madoff and the evidence that will convict you is encrypted, won't you refuse to decrypt with a smile and take the 2-year punishment (with $500M in the bank) over life for financial fraud (and bankruptcy)?
- shill 14y ago
  This is why OTP encryption is unbreakable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_time_pad http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_time_pad
- MBlume 14y ago
  Only if you use a key the size of your data, which is not commonly done.
jgeralnik 14y ago
It's really quite simple. Just xor it with some publicly available text, and then present the result of that xor as the "encryption key". When you xor that result with the original data, you get the publicly available text back.
- nathan_long 14y ago
  And if that works, the prosecution can xor it with some incriminating text...
freehunter 14y ago
To all the people commenting about how you can't prove it: in America, proof means "beyond a reasonable doubt". If you really did have random radio telescope data, the prosecution would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your random data is actually encrypted. The proof for the defense would be called an alibi, wherein you would just say where you downloaded it from and what you used it for. You don't need to prove that it could never be decrypted, you need to provide an alibi and then the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your alibi doesn't hold true. Your alibi is your proof.

adrianN 14y ago

You can decrypt random data to anything if you want to. Say R is your random data and M is the message you want. Compute Key=R+M, then decrypt R-Key=M.

crusso 14y ago
Assuming the encryption method can create the bit sequence that is the random data. It very well might not. There may be gaps in the encrypted data's number space. For any non-trivial encryption method, you'd be brute forcing your way through a bunch of them to find the key that can decrypt the random noise to that message. Typical "20 times longer than the existence of the universe" warnings apply. :)
- jgeralnik 14y ago
  But the encryption method doesn't need to be non-trivial, especially when you define key as anything that (a)allows access to the electronic data, or (b)facilitates the putting of the data into an intelligible form;
  - crusso 14y ago
    So, if you have a meg of random data, you're thinking you could give them a one meg XOR key that decodes it to an MP3 file of "God Save the Queen"? Okay. :)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
basseq 14y ago
This argument is interesting because it both a) makes the law worthless and b) removes the "scary slippery slope" argument. After all, if you can provide a key to anything, then all you have to do (whether it's encrypted financial documents or random noise) is say, "Yep, it's encrypted, here's the key, it's the text of the Wikipedia page for 'kittens.'" Prove that's not the correct key. If the onus for producing a key (whether one exists or not) is on the defendant, isn't the onus for proving the validity of the decrypted file on the prosecution? All this comes back to cases like the one from CA (I think) where the guy who refused to decrypt the evidence that would prove his guilt. And from another perspective, if you're Bernie Madoff and the evidence that will convict you is encrypted, won't you refuse to decrypt with a smile and take the 2-year punishment (with $500M in the bank) over life for financial fraud (and bankruptcy)?
shill 14y ago
This is why OTP encryption is unbreakable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_time_pad http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_time_pad
MBlume 14y ago
Only if you use a key the size of your data, which is not commonly done.

jgeralnik 14y ago

It's really quite simple. Just xor it with some publicly available text, and then present the result of that xor as the "encryption key". When you xor that result with the original data, you get the publicly available text back.

nathan_long 14y ago
And if that works, the prosecution can xor it with some incriminating text...

freehunter 14y ago

To all the people commenting about how you can't prove it: in America, proof means "beyond a reasonable doubt". If you really did have random radio telescope data, the prosecution would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your random data is actually encrypted. The proof for the defense would be called an alibi, wherein you would just say where you downloaded it from and what you used it for. You don't need to prove that it could never be decrypted, you need to provide an alibi and then the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your alibi doesn't hold true. Your alibi is your proof.