Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

British Police Demand Access To Encryption Keys

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the among-other-things dept.

Privacy 814

flip-flop writes "In the wake of recent terrorist attacks, police here in the UK have asked for sweeping new powers they claim will help them counter the threat. Among these is making it a criminal offense for people to refuse disclosing their encryption keys when the police want to access someone's files." From the article: "The most controversial of the police proposals is the demand to be able to hold without charge a terrorist suspect for three months instead of 14 days. An Acpo spokesman said the complexity and scale of counter-terrorist operations means the 14-day maximum is often insufficient."

cancel ×

814 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (5, Interesting)

SeanTobin (138474) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137323)

Innocent until proven guilty. Although that statement is ignored just as often in the US as it is in England, laws that we pass try to at least give the impression that we respect it. So, here is how things go if this passes...

GoodGuy has a friend who is in some domestic trouble and is hiding some of his assets in off-shore accounts. He keeps his friends account information in an encrypted folder on his computer because his friend doesn't want to lose it and trusts him.

EvilAgentMan thinks GoodGuy is a terrorist planning on taking over the world, due to his recent purchase of a salt water aquarium, baby sharks, laser pointers and duct tape. He charges GoodGuy as being a EvilDoer(TM) and puts him in jail. While looking for evidence, he notices an encrypted folder on GoodGuy's computer. He tells GoodGuy that he must hand over his encryption keys or be charged with the crime of not handing over his encryption keys. He must decide on going to jail for something he is completely innocent of, or releasing potentially incriminating evidence on his friend. ...Time to get pricing on high speed internet access on the moon I guess. This planet's done for.

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (5, Insightful)

Spad (470073) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137365)

Worse than that, what happens if your friend is storing the encrypted information on your PC and you *don't have* the decryption key?

Are the police really going to believe "I don't have it, they're not my files"?

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (1)

David Horn (772985) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137437)

What is the situation if I store my encrypted information on a computer in the United States?

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (1)

Kyosuke77 (783293) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137557)

I think they just level an acre of processors at it and break it like the Hulk breaking a twig, which honestly is what should be done in such situations. After all, if I have physical evidence stored in a vault, are they going to compel me with the threat of jailtime to open it for them? Why bother when they can just open it with explosives. Besides the UK constitution surely must have provisions protecting against forces self-incrimination.

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137525)

Worse than that, what happens if your friend is storing the encrypted information on your PC and you *don't have* the decryption key?

Then you'll be found to be aiding and abetting.

If you're holding data for someone that you don't know what it is or how to decrypt it, you will be perceived as an accomplice. Or, just summarily assumed to be the original source of the data and just recalcitrant.

Interesting to see would be if you can have your lawyer hold onto these things and have them covered under privelege.

It's scary that in so-called free societies it can become a crime to keep (possibly legal and innocuous) secrets from the government.

Guantanamo Bay? (3, Insightful)

fantomas (94850) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137370)

"Innocent until proven guilty. Although that statement is ignored just as often in the US as it is in England, laws that we pass try to at least give the impression that we respect it."
umm, Guantanamo Bay? [amnesty.org]

Re:Guantanamo Bay? (2, Insightful)

ejdmoo (193585) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137412)

That's in Cuba, silly. :)

Re:Guantanamo Bay? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137413)

maybe thats why he said its ignored just as often...

Re:Guantanamo Bay? (4, Funny)

SeanTobin (138474) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137425)

umm, Guantanamo Bay?
Yeah.... sorry about that one.
There is at least one additional rule that goes along with innocent until proven guilty. It's guilty until proven American.

Re:Guantanamo Bay? (2, Insightful)

CK2004PA (827615) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137520)

"It's guilty until proven American."

You must be new here. Ever hear of Jose Padilla?

Re:Guantanamo Bay? (1, Interesting)

Charcharodon (611187) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137558)

Guantanamo Bay is a poor example. That is more like guilty, but not prosecuted, that way they never fall under any of the legal protections of either military or civilian law affords to criminals/prisoners. Since they are in limbo they can be held indefinitely for as long as they prove to be usefull sources of information. The ones that are "innocent" in other words just regular Taliban fighters have already been released. The bigger fish will be most likely kept on a stringer someplace till they are old and grey.

Personally I say they should be jailed according to the customs of the societies they were plucked from, have to respect their culture sright? Let's see how many would choose to stay in Guantanamo.

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137462)

Oh, right. Because the U.S.A. is so morally just. I mean, how else could you explain the deaths of over 25,000 civilians in Iraq be a result of trying to "free" them from tyranny? I'm guessing if most of them knew that being "freed" involved carpet-bombing their homes and having their friends and neighbours torn to shreds by Bradley fire, they probably would have stuck with Hussein.

Isn't a subpoena good enough? (3, Insightful)

temojen (678985) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137488)

If you don't comply with a subpoena, you go to jail for contempt of court. Of course a subpoena actually requires judicial approval, whereas a police request for encryption keys does not.

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137513)

Just have an encrypted file hosting another encrypted file and some porn. When they ask for the key, give them only the first one and they just get to see your porn...

Re:Oh yeah, that's why we threw their tea away (1)

Kiffer (206134) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137565)

why is a guy whos "hiding" assets in off-shore accounts Mr.GoodGuy?

I'm sorry I dont understand this right now... perhapps there is more to the situation, but It looks like GoodGuy is possibly helping his friend do something illegal, which probably makes him OrganisedCrimeGuy,
So he has the info on his machine and the cops think his friend is a terrorist, in this case for some random reason, but chances are they are investigating the friend because he's hiding drug money in an offshore account.

Encryption key (5, Funny)

bigwavejas (678602) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137324)

Sure, you can have my encryption key. Here it is:
01100110 01110101 01100011 01101011 00100000 01101111 01100110 01100110

Re:Encryption key (1)

PrvtBurrito (557287) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137364)

heh, clever...

Re:Encryption key (3, Funny)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137434)

One.
Two.
Three.
Four.
Five.

Re:Encryption key (5, Funny)

randm.ca (901207) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137554)

That's amazing, I've got the same combination on my luggage!

Re:Encryption key (1)

EagleScout799 (785430) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137564)

According to this site [theskull.com] , this translates nicely to "fuck off" A sentiment which, I feel, the binary expresses more eloquently than English may ever manage.

pfft (1)

alex323 (901730) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137329)

If the UK want's to decrypt a message, why can't they do it themselves? I'm sure they have enough computing power to do it. (Or they could ask the US for help.. pfft)

Re:pfft (1)

tgrimley (585067) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137371)

I'm a message, you insensitive clod!

Re:pfft (2, Insightful)

notany (528696) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137484)

No. If RSA, AES, Twofish or other good method is correctly used, not even NSA can decrypt them. Yes they have lot's of mathematicians and lots of computing power. But that's not enough.

Finally, if you don't trust any methods above you allways have one time pad that is provably 100% secure. Drawback is that keylength equals to message lenght and key can't be reused.

Re:pfft (1)

alex323 (901730) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137545)

Ever hear of OTR? (Off the record ('otr' on sourceforge)). I'll bet you that the government bans OTR because they can't decrypt the messages.

fuck america (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137335)

and im american

Parent is a terrorist! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137415)

Go get 'em, Georgie!

Re:fuck america (1)

CK2004PA (827615) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137419)

We know, your grammar gives you away.

Safe or private? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137336)

Hmmm... safety or privacy?

This is tough. How can it be done so everyone's happy? I dunno. Who's got the magical solution?

Re:Safe or private? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137386)

I'm not going to feel very safe living in a police state.

Re:Safe or private? (4, Insightful)

Sylver Dragon (445237) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137493)

Terrorist style attacks even happen in police states. Obviously, it impossible to lock things down far enough to give real security, therefore, there is no reason to destroy privacy in a vain attempt to get there.

They already have a law for this (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137343)

Is was put through as part of the criminal justice bill a few years ago. And are considered guilty if you cannot hand over a key for something encrypted in your possession, even if someone sends you a file on a disk. You have no defence and are guilty.

Re:They already have a law for this (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137517)

Cool. Let's send encrypted files to every member of congress/parliment, then turn each of them in as terrorists! The obvious flaw in this law is simple: you can go to jail for not providing the key even if you never had the key to provide in the first place!

Re:They already have a law for this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137522)

So if I have files that are encrypted and I can't produce the key, that itself make me a criminal. What if the files we are talking about is DRM media (e.g. a movie or some song files)?

Does that mean DRM is illegal? ;)

Re:They already have a law for this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137573)

These files are not encrypted, they're filled with random bytes.

Simple Solution (4, Interesting)

USSJoin (896766) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137351)

"I forgot it." Seriously. This is what we do in the U.S., and even if they hold you in contempt-- it's a darn sight better than letting them have access, and seeing what you were up to.

Re:Simple Solution (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137416)

Who do you help?

Those innocent till proven guilty

OR

Those craving for a UK Patriot act

Re:Simple Solution (1)

paulsgre (890463) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137463)

contempt is the best one could hope for. "I forgot" may be more difficult to say when you're naked in a chilled room lying in your own feces.

Re:Simple Solution (1)

amigabill (146897) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137468)

Yea, but remember that when Ronald Regan used that excuse he did actually prove to have Alzheimers. Do you?

Re:Simple Solution (1)

zx75 (304335) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137475)

Time to create some encrypted files on my harddrive with suggestive names and whose keys I generated with my eyes closed. Give them something to think about...

It worked for Oliver North... (1)

kc01 (772943) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137543)

"I have no recollection...."

And now he has a radio show.

Hurrah! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137354)

Now if only they could hold liberals indefinitely... LONG LIVE BUSH!

Re:Hurrah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137480)

Hah, I'd vote to hold liberals indefinitely as long as we can toss Bush in with the lot for his shitty fiscal policy and extra-leftwing immigration policy.

Of course, he'll just brush up on his "Mexican" and flee to Mexico where they'll treat him like a king.

Re:Hurrah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137563)

Hah, I'd vote to hold liberals indefinitely as long as we can toss Bush in with the lot for his shitty fiscal policy and extra-leftwing immigration policy. Of course, he'll just brush up on his "Mexican" and flee to Mexico where they'll treat him like a king.

If there was a god, this would be +5 I N S I G H T F U L

Encryption Keys? (5, Informative)

Taevin (850923) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137358)

Fortunately we have things like StegFS [cam.ac.uk] . But I really shouldn't be disclosing such information, some people in the govA*$%#)D$@#$NO CARRIER

Re:Encryption Keys? (4, Interesting)

nkh (750837) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137530)

I don't know where I've read this (/.?) but the problem with "onion layers" steganography is when they torture you: How do they know you gave them ALL the passwords? Maybe there is "just one more" that will reveal everything? The torture never ends if they know there are multiple layers. (yes, I'm paranoid but I wouldn't like this to happen to me)

Isn't this the age-old "safeguard" of (1)

Solanalos (591222) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137362)

password protecting warez in an archive to prevent anyone from finding out it's warez?

And if you do not have the key? (2, Interesting)

Ritorix (668826) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137363)

How can they prove you have or know the key? Is "I forgot" a valid defense?

Re:And if you do not have the key? (2, Insightful)

snorklewacker (836663) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137497)

If the last write time to the encrypted file was 24 hours ago, they're assuming you might remember after getting a little time in the klink to think about it.

Steve Wright has the right idea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137373)

So "I forgot" is a crime, right? (1)

putko (753330) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137378)

"I forgot my password" gets you 20 years in jail?

This sounds so awful and stupid I don't want to even think about it.

In other news... (1, Funny)

mcmediaman (900722) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137381)

The British contacted the United States Congress today to ask if they could dupe the Patriot Act...

Already an offense? (5, Informative)

moderators_are_w*nke (571920) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137385)

I was pretty sure that the regulation of investigatory powers act (1998?) already made it an offense to refuse to disclose an encryption key?

Re:Already an offense? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137476)

I thought so as well.

Where are civil liberties truly valued? (5, Insightful)

dd (15470) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137389)

The real measure of a free, open and just society is how it behaves in bad times - not in good times. When difficulties arise and the authorities want sweeping powers to 'protect' the citizens, should the citizens give up important civil liberties for what is probably just an illusion of safety? When are you ever safe enough in these times? Maybe the citizens should stop and ask themselves how much they really value their civil liberties - just how far should you go? Maybe the citizens should not crow too loudly about how free, open and just their society is when they look back at how their country has behaved in difficult times..

Big Brother (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137390)

Big Brother is watching, and is protecting you from terrorism.

They keep increasing police powers and surveillance, yet terrorism keeps happening, and false positives keep creeping up.
But so long as people are scared enough, they'll allow for more and more erosions of their rights.

The people who benefit the most from terrorism are the "intelligence community", the more they fail to do their job, the more power they gain. It's beautifull, in a creepy, depressing way.

Re:This is a major point (5, Interesting)

symbolic (11752) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137473)


They want encryption keys, but I dare say that not ONE of the investigators (or government officials) can point to a single connection between the recent stuff in London and encrypted information. They keep demanding solutions to problems that don't exist - that's why this stuff keeps happening. If they'd try to solve the problems that DO exist, they might get somehwere- WITHOUT becoming a police state.

The obvious solution (2, Funny)

BlackCobra43 (596714) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137392)

Is to encrypt all new encryption keys.

What's next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137404)

What are they going to do next...start searching your bags on the subway...oh wait.

Good and Bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137405)

Well. I can see the thing about holding someone for a long time. At least there is a limit on it and not indefenitely as in the U.S. That has got to be worth something right? The encryption keys thing isn't good though.

Employers are competing for Ashcroft? (3, Funny)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137409)

I'm waiting for the suit against the UK by the US claiming ashcroft is violating his non-competition clause...

demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (5, Insightful)

dwbryson (104783) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137411)

Among these is making it a criminal offense for people to refuse disclosing their encryption keys when the police want to access someone's files.

I'm not familiar with British law, but I do know American law is based on the same doctorines as the British(from a historical perspective at least).

In the U.S. the court can order you to provide encryption keys and if you do not you will be held in contempt of the court [wikipedia.org] . This usually means the judge puts you in jail until you decide to provide the keys. To me(IANAL) it seems like the above just formalises the practice. Via the wikipedia reference it appears as though the U.S. did this in 1981.

Being held in contempt of the court is a very normal tool for judges to use with uncooperative court subjects, cryptographic keys aren't special or different.

Re:demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137551)

Can they do the same for someone refusing to say anything in court?

Re:demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (1)

damian cosmas (853143) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137566)

Exactly. It just seems like a tool to facilitate gathering evidence once someone's actually been charged with a crime. It's somewhat analogous to having an actual physical safe full of documents, as opposed to encrypted file(s). Sure, the police can crack it open, and they're going to get the information they're after eventually, but it's quicker and easier for everyone involved just to give them the damn combination.

Re:demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (1)

notany (528696) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137567)

I wonder. What about the "I can't remember", "I must have misplaced it" and "I destroyed it" defences?

The first "I can't remember" has been successfully used buy presidents and highly paid CEO's. It must be great spell in court.

Re:demand encryption keys ? *yawn* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137570)

If you are in the US, why not commit a small crime (vandalism or something), take pictures as evidence, and include it in the encrypted file along with whatever you're encrypting. That way, when they ask you for your keys, you can plead the 5th (for fear of incriminating yourself). Can someone be held in contempt of court for pleading the 5th?

Dont give us any ideas.... (1)

neonenergy (888041) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137417)

So now the gov has a new idea for the next decre-, i mean the patriot act... read this post soon, it will soon become unavaila- - - - Client Disconnected (ISP RESET)

DeCSS (5, Funny)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137423)

I use CSS encryption for all my privacy needs. I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that it would be illegal for me to provide you the software code that breaks it.

QUESTION FOR OPTIX OF GNAA (1)

ADOT Troll (687975) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137427)

do you still have that nasty meth habit you were telling me about on gnaa? man, that's some pretty sick shit you were doing - good thing the authorities don't know about it. lol

man i hope everything is going okay with your meth, your illegally dosing freenode and wikipedo, and your blatant abuse of your security clearance. bye methhead

Out source! (1)

Fr05t (69968) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137428)

"The most controversial of the police proposals is the demand to be able to hold without charge a terrorist suspect for three months instead of 14 days. An Acpo spokesman said the complexity and scale of counter-terrorist operations means the 14-day maximum is often insufficient."

Why not just stick them on a plane heading to the US where they can call them an "enemy combatant" and hold them until the end of time.

PATRIOT Act... (1)

illumina+us (615188) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137429)

It's the PATRIOT Act, UK edition.

Won't be long now (5, Funny)

Slightly Askew (638918) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137430)

Uniting the Kingdom by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism

Re:Won't be long now (-1, Troll)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137508)

Fear Uncertainty and Doubt

Go back under your bridge

Knee jerk tendencies (0, Flamebait)

debrain (29228) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137438)

Brought to you by the same people who advocate counterproductive warmongering as foreign policy and at the same time refuse to aid development of health, education, and basic infrastructure in debt laiden countries that can foster terrorist ideals (and incentives, given the insurmountable debt owed to the first world and a corresponding lack of aid).

The Right to Prevent Self-Incrimination (5, Interesting)

westcoaster004 (893514) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137441)

What is the difference between the right to prevent self-incrimination (i.e. the right to silence) and the right to not say your password?

In England and Wales, "a defendant cannot be convicted solely due to their silence [wikipedia.org] " yet this is saying precisely the opposite.

Self incrimination? (1)

failure-man (870605) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137443)

Doesn't the UK have some sort of protection against being forced to disclose information that would cause you to incriminate yourself? In the US we have this as part of the constitution. (For what that's worth . . . . . )

I would think disclosing the key to your encrypted data would qualify.

Just a coincidence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137446)

Do people think it's just a coincidence that these new "attacks" came just as USA Congress is reviewing the PATRIOT act and deciding whether to renew it?

Do people think it's just a coincidence that these new "attacks" came just as new talks between Israel and Palestine are being proposed?

It is all part of plan to consolidate power over citizens by police, military and politicans, and further domination of Palestinian territories by Israel.

People let it happen (2, Insightful)

krbvroc1 (725200) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137448)

The thing that upsets me the most is not that the gov't tries for this power grab. Instead, it is that the people allow it. There will be a news montage of interviewed commoners says 'I've got to give up my freedoms/rights to fight terrorists'. With that misguided green-light, law enforcement is more than willing to grab powers that were previously unattainable.

I'm not happy that New Yorkers are willing to subject themselves to 'random' searches. I'm pretty sure the London terrorist attacks will be the catylst for widespread CCTV in the U.S.

It's already an offense (4, Informative)

Albanach (527650) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137449)

I'm not sure why they would demand the right to access encryption keys when they already appear to have the power through Section III of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act Link here [homeoffice.gov.uk] .

The article is ambiguous (1)

rock_climbing_guy (630276) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137458)

I know that /.ers will line up to complain about this, but I think that the article is poorly written. They tell us about new powers that the police will have under a proposal, but it doesn't say under what circumstances those powers may be used.

From TFA (2, Insightful)

travail_jgd (80602) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137459)

"They also want to make it a criminal offence for suspects [emphasis mine] to refuse to cooperate in giving the police full access to computer files by refusing to disclose their encryption keys."

I don't see what that problem is, as long as due process is respected. Murder suspects can't turn away search warrants of their property, and if the proper warrants are filled out electronic files should be treated as physical property.

Secret warrants or police officers "going fishing" is another story.

Re:From TFA (1)

spiritraveller (641174) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137556)

don't see what that problem is, as long as due process is respected.

Wouldn't you agree that due process involves not being forced to incriminate yourself?

In the US you cannot be forced to testify against yourself and IIRC that includes documents you have written. I would assume that British citizens have similar rights.

Decrypt this! (0, Troll)

alex323 (901730) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137471)

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) hQQOA5ziOPqiPKD7EA//UPdzmHlowFmIdYQxwfoNf77owIiklG N6k9Cu2et6VSxr Urdec/2GkvqNmrWg/PDvgjF8vNSdY7JG2t6QT1Gc3deUvIYu0s R6VajcEzvCyQ4+ lXY27ohXkJo+RCsPgiMq/b4lXtQ8KE1XM2tElR0mfwAdC6uXGU BFewzrTh/clt97 0rdlpB/S2wM47j6anhIQNow/Wfey2QywPvN3CVcunnatvhqrBK KXuUuK9j9DJ9K5 qb1T2kVTZzXINsyX1Vb/rlrLp25xnq4zn1R5rcewFO8zwo9iWi 8pg9wiWjNR0Lg4 OFpa37EsKBfr1vwQuMkvm21DOvKGUcOGl8zVYWJh71i6yY6rK1 OO9zWuaC0ShFth qBm537YPNjgWdzBHR12GDFqYpTALuNr1XyLbsfYbmDP5jG2c3q dvo3ClnJuA99Mn 2MGFpWARGHRfg9WGszX/bszyPTRRasZ687uZU9ikeKyXI2WFnf JBglO3ZUw/v06K nPx005U4iXCuwVpW5dJLi5ziAOFe3/KV4RMQjwax8CFqIWSpTz Eq03mAb7b2k0Uu PxP1wkU8hKVZCzndaafMWt5hq0V4zTuNImW6fZ1BZrZcjerS8V +wT5QXa6qWOVBe 13HJe6KegTE0KH55A7VJuWcPaEPxTLQXyjSV1M9xyG8d59988f Xtvr9BGqz+6mEP /iNnUSfFGzwZkBdkuouYxS9K9wtnXnyRfQiEYlXZ0L4ww7YAgX hY2fBHs4IRX3DW wlC0D0fgHUaY4L7oLcrDTtCCXzlA/bKKDWKlKYtovTuyIr9DoS LREw2EYZtLaEUE tlBTKva7dqFZUw5kQiN4StFhnWui1aWbn+/8LvciUzLBsRJ9Tt pDCIXctX7nnKxm iHUb5eEDzahLo2Gq7t0LYrbMdFuPfQzT16C1bCXtRL27rcrDSl Xh9Jsb7W6yTPm8 MPtNyE+ClT2ViIVqdF+XeBNcFy0JtD2WU8KePvQwD6CVy6f2M+ +Iex7d2tiveWsx w5/H7U1ieyybqe58n31ayCLoQ2HBraXis2mBc7V4sIFHA4iRlc qJbIgllbWFkRhe RkJClogVCjHNW+g1Xp0Qj6LjdRxk9mI0ESaLAEXT3P0wY6ThMt swIZfoXq31beo6 tom67ektX4WplRKsFskIdQGXHg6Od2yv0hVUHZYGFZzoPOoAjG VON7pgy7zvTIQE WobHKM6xZzPRuOpnyGHIWI2kmFYScygVIbvh8NFYrSidCYMlGj RJl7asUbOuo2H/ k/3kZ1ViAQqUxNhnGIIPDC3s+xVsU0g/rUIyjYvvShaoOTkP1T m5OurBeUOf4xsr Pt0Sq4/+/oJJeSLMeXldue9zEP1zeFPHbOa5G2qPeRMM0lUBW6 0Wimn3EN03veJ7 SC8o5wyXm6uL52xYBXtdY2GBF7b776Nn7b6kI0d22QoCsWbBbj Enb9GYxfj1u8sM /C2gmuZCtd0CuOG3Krj7rZ8pFUpNoQnU =H0RN -----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Re:Decrypt this! (2, Funny)

conteXXt (249905) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137527)

Does it say?

TubGrrl is the shizzz?

Hmm... (1)

sugapablo (600023) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137472)

I'm not sure what British search and seizure laws are, but I assume there must be some kind of probable cause ok'd by a judge or equivilent impartial official? Not that I would be surprised if this sort of thing passed in the US without such protections.

Typical overreaction to terrorism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137485)

So where is this vaunted British stoicism that we've heard so much about? Stiff upper lip, not passing nutso laws, and all that? I predict the smug euro-weenies will be notably absent from comments to this story.

This just goes to show (1)

sykjoke (899173) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137490)

They don't have a fucking clue, and they'll do anything that can to get one, even if it's obtained in dubious ways.

Thankfully, The USA has The Constitution... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137495)

...and Bill of Rights which is totally ignored, where in the UK they don't have a constitution and bill of rights which can be totally ignored.

I don't quite understand why they need this .. (1)

RedLaggedTeut (216304) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137498)

I don't quite understand why they need to keep someone in jail if they can't even charge him with something ..

I mean anything solid enough to make the police want to seek his files so hard also should allow them to charge him.

Why encrypt a text file at all..? (1)

Tominva1045 (587712) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137499)



There are plenty of ways to send data in a normal-looking, non-text file that don't reqire encryption keys.

Sheesh, we know where these guys hang out-- we know how to profile them. Most simply are fearful of upsetting the ACLU (or insert your favorite pricacy rights group here) to step up.

Or is this an after-the-fact forensic computer science (we found some stuff on their hard drive) situation?

So.. a guy willing to blow himself up is suddenly going to be afraid of some new law? Why?

Well Chomsky is in order here... (3, Insightful)

presarioD (771260) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137502)



Be afraid. Be very afraid. Be British and very very very very very afraid:

Noam Chomsky [zmag.org]

The western world is in its worst decadence since the Medieval times...

they're shooting to kill (1)

dlt074 (548126) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137503)

"suspects" because they look like they may have a bomb, and you're worried they might want your encryption key? if you're not a terrorist why would you care. they can waste their time in my junk all day long.

They can have my key (1)

Tyten (726456) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137509)

...when they pry it from my cold dead hands, or brain...whichever.

Crooked cops (1)

ScooterMcGoo (857428) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137526)

What is to stop some government official from harassing people in to turning over keys to their files? Governmental corruption is not unheard of. Seems like a slippery slope to me. Nibble away at freedom a little bit at a time and no one will notice. Hell, you might even get some backers if you say it is to fight terrorism. Look at the US Patriot Act!

Rights of the accused (4, Insightful)

Sneftel (15416) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137528)

The most controversial of the police proposals is the demand to be able to hold without charge a terrorist suspect for three months instead of 14 days. An Acpo spokesman said the complexity and scale of counter-terrorist operations means the 14-day maximum is often insufficient. "The complexities and timescales surrounding forensic examination of [crime] scenes merely add to the burden and immense time pressures on investigating officers," he said. Three-month periods would help to ensure the charge could be sustained in court.
Wow. "Civil liberties are a pain in the arse for us to respect... so could we get rid of them?" In my opinion, the only humane way to look at the rights of the accused is to look at a rhetorical someone who has been wrongly accused. How would Mr. Jones feel about being imprisoned for three months so that police could take their sweet time figuring out what, if anything, to charge him with?

Easy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137533)

Stenography and encryption at same time. Problem solved.

Don't be a huge sensationalist, OK? (1)

jtwJGuevara (749094) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137536)

From TFA:

"They also want to make it a criminal offence for suspects to refuse to cooperate in giving the police full access to computer files by refusing to disclose their encryption keys."

Note, this makes it only illegal to disclose encryption keys or provide access to encrypted files if you are a suspect. I don't know if I agree with this or not and I believe this is very intrusive. But the way the poster submitted this article leads one to believe that the British Police want the overarching ability to access anyone's encrypted files on demand.

Freedom isn't Free (1)

wsherman (154283) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137538)

It is unfortunate that slogans like "Freedom isn't free." and "Live free or die." are most commonly used to justify the deaths of other people rather than to justify a personal desire to risk death in terrorist attacks in order to preserve civil liberties.

Of course, the best way to deter terrorism is to be meticulous in preserving liberty and justice. The idea that freedom and security are mutually exclusive is merely a convenient way for politicians to justify taking more power for themselves.

UK Patriot Act, anyone? (1)

asit+ler (688945) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137542)

I see some striking similarities between our badly-misnamed Patriot act and this request by the UK police force.

Ask the Posters. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13137548)

Isn't there some bootable CD project that makes it so you don't know your own keys? (m00t or something)

Here's My Encryption Key: (1)

patricksevenlee (679708) | more than 9 years ago | (#13137561)

F^(k Y0^
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?