14 ms·

I don't like or support the legislation - but I think this is a bit of an over-reaction. The law as I understand it says that if you've got data (and the conte

by adamt 14y ago

I don't like or support the legislation - but I think this is a bit of an over-reaction. The law as I understand it says that if you've got data (and the context of the law is in focussed primarily on targeting terrorism, child-porn etc) that you've encrypted but refuse to give over the encryption keys to; then if the police then convince a judge that there is valuable evidence in the encrypted data, and you still refuse, then you could ultimately go to prison. Is this really any different to a digital search warrant? Sure this law, like many others, could be abused. But I don't see it as anything to get to wound up about. P.s. what kind of person has a 32GB file of satellite noise to generate random numbers with?!

DanBC 14y ago
(http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/11/ripa-tears-up-the-right-to-rem.html http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009...) > Police argue the files "could be child pornography, there could be bomb-making recipes." Note that he was in prison -serving a sentence- but has since been transferred to a secure mental health hospital where he can be detained under the MHA until he is well. I don't know if he had an appropriate adult with him at any police interviews. I don't know if he had any legal representation at any time. These are weaknesses in the UK system.
- adamt 14y ago
  From that article: he Missed bail; traces of explosives; carrying home made rockets; had a stash of encrypted storage drives with him and the authorities wanted to see what was on them. In such cases the person is still innocent but the authorities have a duty to investigate. Don't get me wrong I am a hacker and someone who has written lots of crypto code, but i don't see this as an example to support the case against the legislation.
SoftwareMaven 14y ago
This is the reaction that is going to destroy all of our civil liberties. "It's only a problem if you're guilty." what kind of person has a file of random (or near enough to not be able to tell without 32gb of them) numbers? Any cryptographer? Many astronomers? Physicists? Better lock them all up!
- dllthomas 14y ago
  Me. I was just recently curious how base64 encoded data would compress (gzip) compared to non-base64 encoded data. I tried it out on a few types of input, including random bytes. It was not, of course, 32gb, but it was large enough it could have been my nefarious plans or not-tiny collection of child porn images or whatever. It doesn't have to be huge to be important - an encrypted file listing a few hundred account numbers could be vital to a money laundering investigation or whatever.
ktizo 14y ago
Well, most people with old VHS tapes have several GB of noise lying around.
ac2u 14y ago
With respect, the attitude above is the problem. The point is to never give them an inch, as they'll use it to take a mile. It goes against the very foundation of modern justice, innocent until proven guilty.

by adamt 14y ago

DanBC 14y ago

(http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/11/ripa-tears-up-the-right-to-rem.html http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009...) > Police argue the files "could be child pornography, there could be bomb-making recipes." Note that he was in prison -serving a sentence- but has since been transferred to a secure mental health hospital where he can be detained under the MHA until he is well. I don't know if he had an appropriate adult with him at any police interviews. I don't know if he had any legal representation at any time. These are weaknesses in the UK system.

adamt 14y ago
From that article: he Missed bail; traces of explosives; carrying home made rockets; had a stash of encrypted storage drives with him and the authorities wanted to see what was on them. In such cases the person is still innocent but the authorities have a duty to investigate. Don't get me wrong I am a hacker and someone who has written lots of crypto code, but i don't see this as an example to support the case against the legislation.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago

This is the reaction that is going to destroy all of our civil liberties. "It's only a problem if you're guilty." what kind of person has a file of random (or near enough to not be able to tell without 32gb of them) numbers? Any cryptographer? Many astronomers? Physicists? Better lock them all up!

dllthomas 14y ago
Me. I was just recently curious how base64 encoded data would compress (gzip) compared to non-base64 encoded data. I tried it out on a few types of input, including random bytes. It was not, of course, 32gb, but it was large enough it could have been my nefarious plans or not-tiny collection of child porn images or whatever. It doesn't have to be huge to be important - an encrypted file listing a few hundred account numbers could be vital to a money laundering investigation or whatever.

ktizo 14y ago

Well, most people with old VHS tapes have several GB of noise lying around.

ac2u 14y ago

With respect, the attitude above is the problem. The point is to never give them an inch, as they'll use it to take a mile. It goes against the very foundation of modern justice, innocent until proven guilty.