Court Demanded To Decrypt PasswordAdded: Thursday, July 21st, 2011
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
In the 21st century, the talk is again about the Fifth Amendment! Some individual is alleged of a mortgage scam, which is not the rare case, but it can prove a test case to see whether it’s unconstitutional for the American government to punish people for refusing to disclose their encryption codes.
According to media reports, the US government has a federal judge to order the accused individual (a woman), Ramona Fricosu, to decrypt her encrypted laptop after she refused the authorities to do so. But it still has to be decided if such a request breaks the American Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which, as you remember, allows citizens to remain silent if they are charged.
The attorney of the suspected woman, Philip Dubois, argued that defendants cannot be constitutionally obligated to help the authorities interpret their files. In response, the American Justice Department insists that the court order is actually a simple extension of a long-standing ability of prosecutors to gather data that could become evidence at the trial.
In case Ramona Fricosu fails to compel, she amounts to a concession that criminals get an easy way out of prosecution – they can simply encrypt all their files and the police won’t be able to access them and collect evidence. Of course, the authorities don’t want this, so the government insists that the accused woman will be allowed to type her passwords in and unlock the encrypted files, and there will be nobody looking over her shoulder to see the passwords themselves. All the authorities wanted was the decrypted information, and they stressed that they didn’t require the woman to provide the password to the laptop – neither orally nor in written form.
The case attracted the attention of many civil rights groups, many of which are saying that the US citizens cannot be demanded to give any compelled testimonial communications. So, the rights groups wanted the legal shield of the Fifth Amendment to cover encryption passwords as well. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) also insisted that the Justice Department's request should have been rejected, because the Fifth Amendment reads that no person can be forced to be a witness against himself in any criminal case.
July 21th,2011Posted by:
Thursday, July 21st, 2011
|I've seen this article in Romania 2.|
|She would also be doing so under duress, which would make the fruit of the action un-admissible evidence in court (like entrapment)|
|give them nothing|
|i'd tell the police that the info the seek is locked up tight under my zipper..so send a female cop and maybe i'll give the info....i dealt w/ the plice and once you are charged you are either found guilty or not guilty, there is no inoccent people once you've been charged|
|posted by (2011-07-22 00:23:56)|
|Thank you Sam......this will become a very important test case to watch....what happends in the U.S.A.....usually gives our stupid government the ok to do the same to us.|
|posted by (2011-07-22 02:21:37)|
|Idiots! If your doing something illegal then screw all your rights. 4th 5th 6th 7th and 8 amendments bullshit which was written 100 years ago that never imagined such technology we use today. Man has your loved one kidnapped and the location is encrypted in his laptop filled with child porn of your kids...would you still be screaming entrapment or rights of the individual?|
|@monkee you have said a big thing. You are being emotional and forgetting law.yes even then I will give a thought to individual rights. My right to make effort to find my child and the other person's right to hide his secrets. Every man has secrets and right to keep them this way. It is like the money hidden in the ground. Which criminal would tell you where he hid his money.|
|posted by (2011-07-22 11:31:09)|
|Oh stop going on about "rights", it's a fictional thing to protect the weak, the only "rights" you have are what you can take yourself, not what someone gives to you, and that works both ways. If the court/legal system/government/whoever can't crack her data, that's their problem for not having the knowledge/resources or not threatening her properly, they can't just say they have a "right" to have it because they're too weak to take it for themselves.|
@zaighum1920 Bullets quickly resolve situations like that, or the threat of them, that or methods like water boarding, believe me, people talk under the right circumstances and don't go on about "rights" again, if it happens to them, it's their problem for being too weak to stop it.
|posted by (2011-07-23 13:22:34)|
|give them nothing|
|It looks like anarchy is certainly alive and well on this site! LOL|
|posted by (2011-07-23 14:40:05)|
|R U Kiddin! Oops, I forgot it! That wasn't it? I thought that was it? Sorry I must have forgotten it!|
|posted by (2011-07-23 15:09:39)|
|B.T.W. - T r u e C r y p t allows you to have 2 passwords for exactly this reason. It also allows for a "file key"! So, here is my password, but without the file key it still won't unlock! They want data from a mortgage fraud scheme - and What? She should just hand it all over? Pretty Please? LOL - Interesting for sure!|
|you and the US forget the real law, its supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, and that was to prevent an innocent person from getting convicted.|
in theory, the logic originally was, its better to have 10 guilty go free than imprison 1 innocent person.
but we all know now YOU are guilty until YOU prove YOU are innocent.
|anyway, let those great fantastic skilled government security agents do their job and crack it.|
but just like the enigma machine, they couldn't do anything until they got one.
The Feds sat they don't want the password and only want the information the accused woman has so they say they won't be looking over her shoulder and all she has to do is just type it in? What moron is working for the Feds that said that?
Heck the information is what will be used against the woman and the 5th applies no matter.
It is clear the Feds really have no evidence and they are on a fishing expedition.
Also maybe they realize the encryption software may be like the type I use; you enter the wrong password x-number of times and a shredder program kicks in destroying all the data..
Most Popular Stories