Re: TI-H: Demolition Calc
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: Demolition Calc
From: Grant Stockly <gussie@alaska.net>
>>In a message dated 12/19/98 1:53:06 PM Central Standard Time,
>>dknaack@geocities.com writes:
>>
>><< >> Question 2c.
>> >> If the answer to 2b was no, should law enforcement agencies
>> >> be able to legally order the decryption of data when they believe
>> >> that it pertains directly to a crime?
>> >Nope. Cracking it is their problem.
>> I think it should be illegal for them to attempt to crack the
encryption.
>> Encrypted data should be treated the same as info stored in your
>> own head, if you don't want to reveal the data, or even reveal the
>> nature of the data, there should be no recourse for law enforcement.
>> Indeed, forcing you you reveal data that you know would incriminate
>> you would violate your 5th amendment rights.
>> >>
>>Good point; hadn't thought of that. In retrospect, I must agree with you
on
>>this.
>
>If the police were doing a drug search, they get to take your 'data', or
>you get to go to jail and explain to the court why the police couldn't look
>into your pockets.
Sure, but that is a case of them simply having the right to search (which
I don't have a problem with), but in the case of encrypted data I don't
think
they should be able to require someone to reveal the contents if those
contents could serve to incriminate them.
I'm not sure if I would make a distinction between physical objects
(which could be secreted in a safe) and data (which can be stored
on a computer in encrypted format). Data is information that could
have been remembered instead of written down, and therefore
possably protected under the 5th amendment (although such
protection only goes so far). Information stored in ones own head
is of course protected with about the best access control you can
get (depending on the person and the means used to get the info
of course, in a US court its pretty safe).
DK