4 ms·

It is common in Sweden that the police never return computers once they have been raided. If they give it back, it will usually at least take some years, the co

It is common in Sweden that the police never return computers once they have been raided. If they give it back, it will usually at least take some years, the computers will be old by then. Ugh. Stuff like this makes me so angry.

ErrantX 17y ago
Agreed though it might not be a completely fair view. Siezed computers would need to be held on to till after any trial - which could be years away. Otherwise the defence can call any computer evidence into question.
- bumblebird 17y ago
  Couldn't they just keep HDDs and give the rest back? Or would that be too logical.
  - ErrantX 17y ago
    yes possibly - though in my experience explaining that to a police office (with no disrespect meant - most are tech illiterate) could be difficult. Then you have the huge issue of explaining that to the jury; the defence would probably still have a field day. And finally, certainly here in the UK so this might not apply elsewhere, there is quite a strict mandate for handling evidence. Returning the computer and keeping the HDD's would almost certainly break those guidelines. It's really illogical all round; the main problem being computer evidence is still treated with suspicion by Juries (probably due to technical misunderstanding) and greeted with delight by defense teams (who will take joy in asking obscure, mundane and irrelevant questions :D just to derail things) Finally: complex investigations might really take months to complete (as in 8 or 10). And then going to trial can take upwards of 2 years. EDIT: with all of that said I strongly disagree with the police actions in this case. Not giving a list of seizures, even within a few hours, is definite grounds for massive legal action here. It would be unheard of, frankly. Not giving computers back after, say, 5 months where the case was unproven or the computers irrelevant would also be wrong. In the case where information was found but no trial forthcoming stuff should be returned within 2 years. I wont comment on the legality of the raid though; we are only getting one side of the story and it could be there is evidence to have raided them. We also haven't seen or heard about the warrant used; so we cant really speculate on the legality of the seizures.
weaksauce 17y ago
This happens in a lot of countries. It's unfortunate at best, malicious at worst.
- wallflower 17y ago
  Example: 2009 April FBI raid on Core IP Dallas data center http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=546067 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=546067 > [Core IP CEO] Simpson added that there were 50 businesses without access to email and data due to the raid. "If you run a datacenter, please be aware that in our great country, the FBI can come into your place of business at any time and take whatever they want, with no reason," he wrote. Bruce Sterling foreshadows "Data Havens" "A data haven is a computer or a network that holds data protected from government action by both technical means (encryption) and location in a country that has either no laws, or poorly-enforced laws restricting use of data and no extradition treaties." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_haven http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_haven
  - rdtsc 17y ago
    In case of encrypted data, can't the US government legally force one to disclose passwords following a raid? In other words they might raid a company, they find encrypted hard drives so they ask for passwords. Then does revealing passwords fall under "self-incriminating" or not revealing them fall under "obstructing justice"?
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
    - tsally 17y ago
      My understanding is that in the US, passwords fall under the 5th amendment. Here's an example where a subpoena ordering the defendant to enter in a password was quashed: http://www.eff.org/files/Boucher.pdf http://www.eff.org/files/Boucher.pdf
      - jrockway 17y ago
dbz 17y ago
I agree. What will the police even do with the computers? There should be laws against that kind of thing. Seriously disgusting.

ErrantX 17y ago

Agreed though it might not be a completely fair view. Siezed computers would need to be held on to till after any trial - which could be years away. Otherwise the defence can call any computer evidence into question.

bumblebird 17y ago
Couldn't they just keep HDDs and give the rest back? Or would that be too logical.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  yes possibly - though in my experience explaining that to a police office (with no disrespect meant - most are tech illiterate) could be difficult. Then you have the huge issue of explaining that to the jury; the defence would probably still have a field day. And finally, certainly here in the UK so this might not apply elsewhere, there is quite a strict mandate for handling evidence. Returning the computer and keeping the HDD's would almost certainly break those guidelines. It's really illogical all round; the main problem being computer evidence is still treated with suspicion by Juries (probably due to technical misunderstanding) and greeted with delight by defense teams (who will take joy in asking obscure, mundane and irrelevant questions :D just to derail things) Finally: complex investigations might really take months to complete (as in 8 or 10). And then going to trial can take upwards of 2 years. EDIT: with all of that said I strongly disagree with the police actions in this case. Not giving a list of seizures, even within a few hours, is definite grounds for massive legal action here. It would be unheard of, frankly. Not giving computers back after, say, 5 months where the case was unproven or the computers irrelevant would also be wrong. In the case where information was found but no trial forthcoming stuff should be returned within 2 years. I wont comment on the legality of the raid though; we are only getting one side of the story and it could be there is evidence to have raided them. We also haven't seen or heard about the warrant used; so we cant really speculate on the legality of the seizures.

weaksauce 17y ago

This happens in a lot of countries. It's unfortunate at best, malicious at worst.

wallflower 17y ago
Example: 2009 April FBI raid on Core IP Dallas data center http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=546067 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=546067 > [Core IP CEO] Simpson added that there were 50 businesses without access to email and data due to the raid. "If you run a datacenter, please be aware that in our great country, the FBI can come into your place of business at any time and take whatever they want, with no reason," he wrote. Bruce Sterling foreshadows "Data Havens" "A data haven is a computer or a network that holds data protected from government action by both technical means (encryption) and location in a country that has either no laws, or poorly-enforced laws restricting use of data and no extradition treaties." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_haven http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_haven
- rdtsc 17y ago
  In case of encrypted data, can't the US government legally force one to disclose passwords following a raid? In other words they might raid a company, they find encrypted hard drives so they ask for passwords. Then does revealing passwords fall under "self-incriminating" or not revealing them fall under "obstructing justice"?
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - tsally 17y ago
    My understanding is that in the US, passwords fall under the 5th amendment. Here's an example where a subpoena ordering the defendant to enter in a password was quashed: http://www.eff.org/files/Boucher.pdf http://www.eff.org/files/Boucher.pdf
    - jrockway 17y ago

dbz 17y ago

I agree. What will the police even do with the computers? There should be laws against that kind of thing. Seriously disgusting.