Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 765854 19-Feb-2013 15:52
Send private message

russelo:

I suppose a hidden volume would be the way to go in this instance (assuming you were one wanting to hide something) as a court would order you to decrypt the drive, you would provide a key for the decoy drive and proving that you have provided a decoy key would be incredibly difficult.


Is a hidden volume enough to acquit you?  What if the judge is smart enough to know this feature and requires you to hand over the second key?  There's no way to prove if there is indeed a hidden volume, can you still be held in contempt for not providing the key to a 'only you knows' existing or non-existing hidden volume?


Thats not how it works

Have a look here:

http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/hidden-volume



2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 765855 19-Feb-2013 15:54
Send private message

ajobbins:
russelo: Is a hidden volume enough to acquit you?  What if the judge is smart enough to know this feature and requires you to hand over the second key?  There's no way to prove if there is indeed a hidden volume, can you still be held in contempt for not providing the key to a 'only you knows' existing or non-existing hidden volume?


The difference is that there is no argument that there is an encrypted volume. They can therefore require you to hand over the key.

With a hidden volume they can't know that it is (or isn't) there. If you hand over the key to the 'good' volume, there is nothing more they can do or ask of you.

Suggesting that there was a hidden volume would be conjecture.


Nicely explained.

 
 
 
 


28 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 6


  Reply # 765856 19-Feb-2013 15:55
Send private message

SaltyNZ: 
You will never see a government vote to decrease their powers. Historically, getting that to happen requires a revolution.


Not true... for example hereherehere (explained here), part 2 subpart 8 of the Evidence Act, (eg s60), here...

Among others

4027 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1607

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 765858 19-Feb-2013 16:10
Send private message

muso:
SaltyNZ: 
You will never see a government vote to decrease their powers. Historically, getting that to happen requires a revolution.


Not true... for example hereherehere (explained here), part 2 subpart 8 of the Evidence Act, (eg s60), here...

Among others


I'll give you some of those but not all.

The king didn't sign the Magna Carta because he was a nice guy; he signed it because the nobles - who commanded significant armies of their own - threatened him, in a nutshell. It's not an accident that high ranking nobles are referred to as 'peers'. That's their chosen word, not the monarch's. 

Likewise the Fourth Amendment - you're talking about a very new government that had just been formed by a revolution. It is quite telling that contemporary US governments are quite handy at waving away Fourth Amendment objections. In point of fact in a lot of ways, common law countries with *no* constitutional rights to things like free speech often have in practice more protections than the US.

Anyway, perhaps I should not have used the word 'never'. Let me say instead that it is the exception to the rule.




iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


28 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 6


  Reply # 765861 19-Feb-2013 16:13
Send private message

SaltyNZ:
Let me say instead that it is the exception to the rule.


Agreed :)

1344 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 118


  Reply # 765865 19-Feb-2013 16:29
Send private message

1080p:
timbosan:
Judge David Harvey told me about it in 2003: No right to silence for computer users.


I wish Judge Harvey was a member here on Geekzone, the guy is very smart and really sets the stage for how the legal system in NZ can embrace and understand technology.  If you ever have a chance, read his papers.


Where is he published? Does he lecture for a university or something?


I had access to some papers via my University subscription, but a quick search picked this up - directly related to this very thread.

EVERYONE should read this.

http://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/125201/Waikato-Law-Review-vol-4-Issue-2-1996.pdf

There is even reference to a case that highlights self incrimination.

(Starts on Page 64, WARNING - PDF LINK!!!)



2947 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 836

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 765895 19-Feb-2013 18:22
Send private message

1080p: I remember reading about this case in which the police went to incredible lengths to secure an offender's computer while it was on and decrypted so they were able to analyse its contents. Would this mean a judge could not have ordered the drive's decryption or simply that the police wanted an easier time gathering evidence?

My interest is based on the rising number of crimes being committed online, from hacking to child pornography to copyright infringement, and the technical inability to crack such encryption systems when administered correctly. 


I think this line from the article you've linked to adresses much of what you ask here: "We were aware if we didn't get the system live it would be a boat anchor and the success of the case would be hugely compromised."



1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user


  Reply # 765942 19-Feb-2013 20:40
Send private message

Dratsab:
1080p: I remember reading about this case in which the police went to incredible lengths to secure an offender's computer while it was on and decrypted so they were able to analyse its contents. Would this mean a judge could not have ordered the drive's decryption or simply that the police wanted an easier time gathering evidence?

My interest is based on the rising number of crimes being committed online, from hacking to child pornography to copyright infringement, and the technical inability to crack such encryption systems when administered correctly. 


I think this line from the article you've linked to adresses much of what you ask here: "We were aware if we didn't get the system live it would be a boat anchor and the success of the case would be hugely compromised."


Indeed, I was interested to know whether not having the computer in a decrypted state would actually be a hindrance to a case/investigation or if a judge could simply order the keys be handed over. It turns out that a judge can do just that according to the legislation linked in this thread.

I wonder why they went to so much work in that case, they teamed up with the FBI and coordinated a chat with the man while they conducted the raid. It seems like an incredible amount of effort to go to if they could simply order the man to hand over decryption keys after the fact.

This is why I am interested in contempt of court, I suppose a judge cannot keep you in prison indefinitely so perhaps keeping your mouth shut would lead to less time in prison overall, depending on the charge.

826 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 113


  Reply # 765943 19-Feb-2013 20:40
Send private message

In the mid 2000's I worked for the NZ police e-crime department.  We had a case where someone had what we believed to be encrypted wav files on his machine.  He had conveniently forgotten all his passwords and at the time (from memory) the punishment for withholding a password was significantly less harsh than the punishment he would have received if the encrypted files contained the bad stuff that was suspected.

I don't work there anymore and don't know if the law has changed since.



1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user


  Reply # 765944 19-Feb-2013 20:42
Send private message

timbosan:
1080p:
timbosan:
Judge David Harvey told me about it in 2003: No right to silence for computer users.


I wish Judge Harvey was a member here on Geekzone, the guy is very smart and really sets the stage for how the legal system in NZ can embrace and understand technology.  If you ever have a chance, read his papers.


Where is he published? Does he lecture for a university or something?


I had access to some papers via my University subscription, but a quick search picked this up - directly related to this very thread.

EVERYONE should read this.

http://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/125201/Waikato-Law-Review-vol-4-Issue-2-1996.pdf

There is even reference to a case that highlights self incrimination.

(Starts on Page 64, WARNING - PDF LINK!!!)




Tanks for this, I'll see if a friend can get a copy of his publications. I am interested to see what he has said.



1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user


  Reply # 805205 24-Apr-2013 22:43
Send private message

I just came across this and although it is all based in US law I would imagine something similar would occur here. If a judge had reason/suspicion to believe you were intentionally answering "I don't know/can't remember." to questions about your password then he'd likely just hold you in contempt. I wonder how difficult it would be to convince a judge that you have forgotten a 64 character password?

3373 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 385

Trusted

  Reply # 805239 24-Apr-2013 23:21
One person supports this post
Send private message

Interesting thread and very glad you posted it. The right to silence does seem like a thing of the past. I wonder how many NZers realize that? It's interesting in America too how they let the terorists win by destroying their freedoms from the inside in the name of security.





5049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2082

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 805326 25-Apr-2013 09:44
Send private message

Implement a kill switch. E.G. Hand over valid encryption keys, but system needs a secondary (silent) authentication within a small time frame, else it will activate an auto re-encrypt with random keys, or a more exciting self destruct sequence.




Chorus has spent $1.4 billion on making their xDSL broadband network faster. If your still stuck on ADSL or VDSL, why not spend from $150 on a master filter install to make sure you are getting the most out of your connection?
I install - Naked DSL, DSL Master Splitters, VoIP, data cabling and general computer support for home and small business.
Rural Broadband RBI installer for Ultimate Broadband and Full Flavour

 

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com


4027 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1607

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 805329 25-Apr-2013 10:05
Send private message

TrueCrypt has lots of plausible deniability features... fake volumes that are presented if a special key is entered instead of the real one, for example.




iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.




1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user


  Reply # 836092 12-Jun-2013 22:53
Send private message

Well, everything I own that is able to store data (with the exception of my phone and tablet) is now encrypted and plausibly deniable.

My only remaining 'weaknesses' are my workstation SSD which is too small to install a guest OS in an outer volume and a secret one in an inner volume; this will change as soon as I can pick up a larger SSD and my ZFS server has disk level AES but is not plausibly deniable. I don't know of a better solution, however.

Transfer rates for items like external HDDs are not affected noticeably either which is a bonus.

I had no reason to worry beforehand but this was surprisingly simple to configure and maintenance is a breeze (non existent): I recommend it. :)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Why I'm not an early adopter
Posted 21-Nov-2017 10:39


Netatmo launches smart home products in New Zealand
Posted 20-Nov-2017 20:06


Huawei Mate 10: Punchy, long battery life, artificial intelligence
Posted 20-Nov-2017 16:30


Propel launch Disney Star Wars Laser Battle Drones
Posted 19-Nov-2017 21:26


UFB killer app: Speed
Posted 17-Nov-2017 17:01


The case for RSS — MacSparky
Posted 13-Nov-2017 14:35


WordPress and Indieweb: Take control of your online presence — 6:30 GridAKL Nov 30
Posted 11-Nov-2017 13:43


Chorus reveals technology upgrade for schools, students
Posted 10-Nov-2017 10:28


Vodafone says Internet of Things (IoT) crucial for digital transformation
Posted 10-Nov-2017 10:06


Police and Facebook launch AMBER Alerts system in NZ
Posted 9-Nov-2017 10:49


Amazon debuts Fire TV Stick Basic Edition in over 100 new countries
Posted 8-Nov-2017 05:34


Vodafone VoIP transition to start this month
Posted 7-Nov-2017 12:33


Spark enhances IoT network capability
Posted 7-Nov-2017 11:33


Vocus NZ sale and broadband competition
Posted 6-Nov-2017 14:36


Hawaiki reaches key milestone in landmark deep-sea fibre project
Posted 4-Nov-2017 13:53



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.