Home› Spurious Generalities

US Court rules Truecrypt is legal when on a seized machine

RemadERemadE Global Moderator
edited February 2012 in Spurious Generalities
Interesting read - a transcript/summary from a court hearing where a guy had CP on his machine (the bad part) but used Truecrypt to hid it which was therefore inaccessible to the Law Enforcement Officers (the good part). So there we go. I now don't need to be scared for having .txt files and incriminating things I have in my Truecrypt volume, and hopefully neither should you assuming you use it.

Source (PDF).
Share on Twitter

Comments

  • chippychippy <b style="color:pink;">Global Moderator</b>
    edited February 2012
    Well fuck me, I got 1/2 way through reading that, and realised I was hopelessly lost in legal jargon and gobbledygook. I'll try reading it another time before I have a drink!
    Share on Twitter
  • PacoPaco me administrator
    edited February 2012
    This is a really good read. I'm about half way through right now.
    Share on Twitter
  • SlartibartfastSlartibartfast Global Moderator -__-
    edited February 2012
    The original verdict was that the password is not protected under the 5th amendment. On appeal it was decided that it was.

    We don't have anything protecting us like that here. Maybe some common law. The problem with common law is that precedents are not binding (only strongly encouraged). Each judge can do what he wants and say that the other judge was wrong.

    We have to rely on "I forgot the password, now what cunt?" and risk contempt of court.

    There was another case involving a women and property fraud. The exact same findings. I think the idea is to wear out the accused.

    You know what this will eventually lead to guys? Making encryption without a permit illegal.
    Share on Twitter
  • DfgDfg Admin
    edited February 2012
    Time to install Truecrypt then, I did read most of it, it started off as interesting but then the legal jargon made it harder to read but still, there is hope for us. I think it would be much better if we just have a self destruct type of control where it would just delete or encrypt everything making it useless.
    Share on Twitter
  • DfgDfg Admin
    edited February 2012
    2yo getting raped during diaper change

    Tehehhe
    Share on Twitter
  • chippychippy <b style="color:pink;">Global Moderator</b>
    edited February 2012
    I think the way to go is to have two lots of encrypted data on two passwords. One lot of data quite innocuous, say some e books or something and the second set, the data you want to hide. You could reluctantly give them the password to the first set of data. As they cannot work out what the encrypted data contains, the size of encrypted data bears no relationship to the decrypted data they would not know that they don't have access to everything.
    Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.