Anglo Irish passwords

Qualitymark

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/1110/1224283024474.html

(From November 10):

FORMER ANGLO Irish Bank staff who have failed to give the bank passwords for protected documents have delayed a two-year inquiry by the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the High Court heard yesterday.

Why has this story sunk under? Has it been forgotten because the passwords would reveal exactly who - in the Government, in the civil service, among the great and good - is involved in Anglo Irish?

The bank is now owned by the State, and so those holding the passwords are refusing to reveal them to their own employers. If the Government wanted the passwords it should certainly be possible to get them from its own employees. If the Government wanted them. If.

robbyvibes

If it were true the Gardai couldn't recover the passwords, details of the files in question should be released to the public.

What type of files require passwords? (word document, zip archives, spreadsheet or something else?)

You cannot assess the technical requirements for recovery when we know absolutely nothing about the type of files or even the software used to protect them, so far, everything i've seen has been speculative.

Legislation is already in place which requires those being questioned as part of an investigation to provide passwords to files.. so why aren't the people being questioned prosecuted for with holding that information?

Clearly, the government are as usual, lying to protect themselves.

P. Breathnach

robbyvibes wrote: »

... Clearly, the government are as usual, lying to protect themselves.

It's not clear to me. Please join up the dots so that I might understand the basis of your allegation.

maxwell smart

Every system has a backdoor. They need to go to the guys that designed it and get access. I've never come across a system that does not have such a failsafe in a large organisation primarily because people forget their passwords and also for cases where guys get fired or go to a competitor.

Something a bit fishy OR they just havn't thought of this simple idea!

kippy

maxwell smart wrote: »

Every system has a backdoor. They need to go to the guys that designed it and get access. I've never come across a system that does not have such a failsafe in a large organisation primarily because people forget their passwords and also for cases where guys get fired or go to a competitor.

Something a bit fishy OR they just havn't thought of this simple idea!

It depends on the "system".
It is unlikely software such as truecrypt would have a "Backdoor" as it is not controlled by the organisation in question.


Sorry, just pointing out the potential technical side of it.

From a real standpoint we have laws that provide for punishment should people not provide passwords however we also have past history of letting people off who say they have "forgotten" various pieces of important information. (See B. Ahern - Mahon (and other) tribunals.)

Bob_Latchford

The might also be saying "password" as its easier than "encrypted" for general public.

Still a sorry state of affairs. If the laws exist to prosecute, then use them

Qualitymark

I know that some of the people posting on Boards work for (or have worked for) companies that recover lost software from hard drives inaccessible for one reason or another. Have they any comment?

Bob_Latchford

Good encryption is good encryption because it cant be broken.

Arrest them prosecute and jail is easier than than a technical solution. imo

kippy

Qualitymark wrote: »

I know that some of the people posting on Boards work for (or have worked for) companies that recover lost software from hard drives inaccessible for one reason or another. Have they any comment?

Thats a completely different kettle of fish to encryption.
Recovering deleted or "lost" data is far easier than breaking advanced encryption algorithms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encryption
http://news.techworld.com/security/3228701/fbi-hackers-fail-to-crack-truecrypt/

Truecrypt is a free piece of software which is relatively easy to use.



However as someone has posted we have no details of what these files are and how they are "password" protected but based on limited detail I suspect something outside the control of the IT department, such as truecrypt has been used.

Again, our past history of prosecution in these cases is poor - I said that would come back to bite us at some stage (letting the bould aherne off with it)

ntlbell

Qualitymark wrote: »

I know that some of the people posting on Boards work for (or have worked for) companies that recover lost software from hard drives inaccessible for one reason or another. Have they any comment?

It's impossible to give any reasonable comment from a technical point of view when there are little or no facts.

This is not related to recovering "lost data" it's not "lost" as someone mentioned all ready it comes down to how the data was encrypted. I've been to a lot of talks from the cyber crime squad based on this I wouldn't hold out much hope

soundbyte

My understanding is that they mean simple system login names and passes. The first to launch the windows type scenario which allows access to the bank intranet, email etc and the second level login is for accessing account details etc.

ntlbell

soundbyte wrote: »

My understanding is that they mean simple system login names and passes. The first to launch the windows type scenario which allows access to the bank intranet, email etc and the second level login is for accessing account details etc.

If this was the case why can't any of the sys admins be made provide the details?

pah

ntlbell wrote: »

It's impossible to give any reasonable comment from a technical point of view when there are little or no facts.

This is not related to recovering "lost data" it's not "lost" as someone mentioned all ready it comes down to how the data was encrypted. I've been to a lot of talks from the cyber crime squad based on this I wouldn't hold out much hope

Agreed, also a password might be required to unlock a Truecrypt volume but a key can also be used - anything from a file such as a photo or even mp3 can be a keyfile.

I personally have a truecrypt volume on my memory stick and the keyfile to unlock the volume on another stick,

soundbyte

ntlbell wrote: »

If this was the case why can't any of the sys admins be made provide the details?

Exactly. Even a lackey from Siemens can do it.

kippy

Its fairly obvious that it is not a straightforward Anglo IT system password.
If it was then this country really is a joke.

robbyvibes

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's not clear to me. Please join up the dots so that I might understand the basis of your allegation.

The basis was outlined in the post.

I would recommend reading my post before promoting the silly notion "it's very difficult" having no knowledge of the pertinent technical details.

IF you have the technical details, please share them and we can generate relevant statistics on how much time it would take to recover a password.

To briefly make my point, someone posted before that there are 70 quadrillion possible combinations for 56-bit DES which is correct although DES is so old now, it's unlikely to be used..but let's use it for example.

worst case scenario, using a home PC with 10 million keys a second.

Min password length = 1
Max password length = 7
Alphabet length = 255
Number of computers/processors = 1
Total combinations: 70,386,233,652,806,655

ETA: 223 years, 70 days, 13 hours, 9 minutes, 25 seconds

However, in our case, the user is using his keyboard, consisting of ~94 alpha-numeric characters and symbols.

Min password length = 1
Max password length = 7
Alphabet length = 94
Number of computers/processors = 1
Total combinations: 65,545,047,154,954

ETA: 0 years, 75 days, 20 hours, 41 minutes, 44 seconds

those are just using a home pc..what if we used a super computer with 15,000 CPU in it?

Min password length = 1
Max password length = 7
Alphabet length = 94
Number of computers/processors = 15,000
Total combinations: 65,545,047,154,954

ETA: 0 years, 0 days, 0 hours, 7 minutes, 16 seconds

The above are just examples of what's possible.

Unless we know about the encryption used to protect the files, there's no way of knowing how long it would take to recover a key for an encrypted file.

P. Breathnach

robbyvibes wrote: »

The basis was outlined in the post.

I would recommend reading my post before promoting the silly notion "it's very difficult" having no knowledge of the pertinent technical details....

And I would recommend reading my post, because you did not deal with the specific point I raised.

robbyvibes

P. Breathnach wrote: »

And I would recommend reading my post, because you did not deal with the specific point I raised.

It was a bit vague, maybe you could join the dots and clarify for me? :rolleyes:

Given the track record of FF and this useless, absolutely worthless government, forgive me for my reluctance to believe anything they say anymore.

The big fiction here is that FF are telling Irish people the truth about Anglo.

Maybe you believe them even after everything that's happened?
Forgive me for assuming you're part of the same useless system.

I don't believe a word they say.

kippy

P. Breathnach wrote: »

And I would recommend reading my post, because you did not deal with the specific point I raised.

I suppose P, the issue you have is you cannot allow someone to make the link between this and a potential government coverup. Thats a fair thing to do.
There probably isnt a government coverup and there probably is (as I have shown, and given the right circumstances) a reason why these files cannot be opened.

However, people have every right to feel aggrieved that the state are not able to open these files and even moreso that those who set the passwords on these files will not disclose them.

Then we have the issues around whether or not these people will get prosecuted for withholding information, perverting the course of justice (or whatever law we have for that) etc etc etc.

What will happen here is what has happened for years in this country. A lack of wanting to enforce white collar crime laws.
As I said, we let Bertie off with forgetting, every low life criminal and indeed white collar criminal can expect to get the same treatment for "forgetting".


(I amnt backing up the dot joining your requested by the way, its a very tenious link at best)

robbyvibes

Not directed at anyone specifically but I'm not looking for anyone's approval on my own opinion.

The technical details of the encrypted files have not been made public so it's impossible to unequivocally publish the length of time required to recover the passwords.

I do not believe anything the government say anymore and I cannot fathom why anyone else would given the history of FF.

If you want to support a corrupt government which has lied consistently to protect itself and are about to decimate your country with the help of IMF, that's entirely up to you.

P. Breathnach

robbyvibes wrote: »

...
Forgive me for assuming you're part of the same useless system....

No, I will not.

That is contemptible.

kippy

robbyvibes wrote: »

Not directed at anyone specifically but I'm not looking for anyone's approval on my own opinion.

The technical details of the encrypted files have not been made public so it's impossible to unequivocally publish the length of time required to recover the passwords.

I do not believe anything the government say anymore and I cannot fathom why anyone else would given the history of FF.

If you want to support a corrupt government which has lied consistently to protect itself and are about to decimate your country with the help of IMF, that's entirely up to you.

The point is, its not just the government who are saying the time required to "crack" the passwords is very high, there is on poster here who has spoken to the organisation who are looking at this and they have said the same thing..........

What you should be annoyed about is the fact that white collar crime has not and does not look to be getting punished in this country, which is a totally seperate point to the length of time required to "break" this encryption.

Yeah, we're all pissed at what has gone on and indeed the complicity of FF in it, however getting two issues muddied up is not going to help.

P. Breathnach

kippy wrote: »

I suppose P, the issue you have is you cannot allow someone to make the link between this and a potential government coverup....

It's more that I dislike important issues becoming obscured by intemperate attitudinising.

It is wrong that people who were employed in Anglo-Irish conceal files that belong to that bank, and which are required for the conduct of a Garda investigation. It is a fair bet that those withholding passwords have their own reasons for doing so, and I suspect that their reasons are ignoble.

To go from that base to it being an instance of the government telling lies is a big leap. Unless it is shown to be a reasonable comment, it simply distorts an important issue.

kippy

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's more that I dislike important issues becoming obscured by intemperate attitudinising.

It is wrong that people who were employed in Anglo-Irish conceal files that belong to that bank, and which are required for the conduct of a Garda investigation. It is a fair bet that those withholding passwords have their own reasons for doing so, and I suspect that their reasons are ignoble.

To go from that base to it being an instance of the government telling lies is a big leap. Unless it is shown to be a reasonable comment, it simply distorts an important issue.

I would agree.

Slick50

Why is "breaking the encryption" necessary? Why hasn't anybody been prosecuted for with holding information. Surely these files are being accessed on a daily basis, as Anglo is currently a going concern, so they can't even claim to have "forgotten" them.

The full force of the law was brought to bare on a few citizens up in mayo, who had the audacity to show contempt for the law, and jailed indefinitely for their cheek.

Who is heading up this "investigation", and why hasn't he been fired for gross incompetence, or at best inaction.

If there was any political will to resolve this issue, you could bet your house and shirt on it, it would be complete by now. So that begs the question, why hasn't it.

sunshinediver

Slick50 wrote: »

Why is "breaking the encryption" necessary? Why hasn't anybody been prosecuted for with holding information. Surely these files are being accessed on a daily basis, as Anglo is currently a going concern, so they can't even claim to have "forgotten" them.

The full force of the law was brought to bare on a few citizens up in mayo, who had the audacity to show contempt for the law, and jailed indefinitely for their cheek.

Who is heading up this "investigation", and why hasn't he been fired for gross incompetence, or at best inaction.

If there was any political will to resolve this issue, you could bet your house and shirt on it, it would be complete by now. So that begs the question, why hasn't it.

I'm glad someone else sees this. The technical discussion of a computers ability to crack the passwords is really only a side issue. At the moment the political will doesn't exist to investigate these files. You can be certain that whatever is in them neither Anglo or the government want people to know. The fact this story is receiving little media attention (much of which surprisingly is still pro government) further highlights this point.

A full investigation into Anglo will more than likely implicate many of our government members, this is worth bearing in mind when asking questions about why this investigation is taking so long.

kippy

sunshinediver wrote: »

I'm glad someone else sees this. The technical discussion of a computers ability to crack the passwords is really only a side issue. At the moment the political will doesn't exist to investigate these files. You can be certain that whatever is in them neither Anglo or the government want people to know. The fact this story is receiving little media attention (much of which surprisingly is still pro government) further highlights this point.

A full investigation into Anglo will more than likely implicate many of our government members, this is worth bearing in mind when asking questions about why this investigation is taking so long.

I have to be honest here and ask what the fudge would happen if what was in these files was something the government did not want us to know?

As I said before, we dont exactly punish wrong doing by certain sectors of our society.

Dorcha

ntlbell wrote: »

It's impossible to give any reasonable comment from a technical point of view when there are little or no facts.

This is not related to recovering "lost data" it's not "lost" as someone mentioned all ready it comes down to how the data was encrypted. I've been to a lot of talks from the cyber crime squad based on this I wouldn't hold out much hope

I understand from the reports that the files are being decrypted using trial and error, but this is obviously taking much longer than if they had the passwords.


The whole thing is a farce. Those people are holding on to something that is not their property (the passwords). Why haven't they been taken to court and made to produce them, or else be jailed?

ntlbell

Dorcha wrote: »

I understand from the reports that the files are being decrypted using trial and error, but this is obviously taking much longer than if they had the passwords.


The whole thing is a farce. Those people are holding on to something that is not their property (the passwords). Why haven't they been taken to court and made to produce them, or else be jailed?

It's very difficult to bring someone to court based on something they've "forgotten"

Trying to prove they haven't forgotten would be nigh impossible

Bob_Latchford

ntlbell wrote: »

It's very difficult to bring someone to court based on something they've "forgotten"

Trying to prove they haven't forgotten would be nigh impossible

Its in public interest that they are arrested charged and prosecuted. Get 11 jurors up in court to decide. Get whoever it is in court, get whatever these files are disclosed in open.

If they are found not guilty due to lack of evidence fair enough.

ntlbell

Bob_Latchford wrote: »

Its in public interest that they are arrested charged and prosecuted. Get 11 jurors up in court to decide. Get whoever it is in court, get whatever these files are disclosed in open.

If they are found not guilty due to lack of evidence fair enough.

arrest them for what? we have no idea who these people are, what the files are what's in them and even if they've done anything wrong.

Don't get me wrong here, I want to see this thing wrapped up as quickly as possible and if people comitted crimes to be punished.

What is the charge ?

I would prefer they took their time gathered the correct evidence and prosecuted rather than doing anything rash and people getting off because of our recklesness.

It's not as straight forward as you seem to be making out

Bob_Latchford

ntlbell wrote: »

arrest them for what? we have no idea who these people are, what the files are what's in them and even if they've done anything wrong.

Don't get me wrong here, I want to see this thing wrapped up as quickly as possible and if people comitted crimes to be punished.

What is the charge ?

I would prefer they took their time gathered the correct evidence and prosecuted rather than doing anything rash and people getting off because of our recklesness.

It's not as straight forward as you seem to be making out

It is straight forward to me. I never mentioned anything rash or reckless or timescales.

They should be prosecuted in the public interest as its damaging public confidence that the facts are kept behind closed doors.

If there is full report publically available that Doris in accounts forgot the password to March expenses I would take that to.

Qualitymark

They should be prosecuted for obstructing the course of justice. There's an investigation into a suspicion of fraud, and they're refusing to help that investigation.

ntlbell

Qualitymark wrote: »

They should be prosecuted for obstructing the course of justice. There's an investigation into a suspicion of fraud, and they're refusing to help that investigation.

They're not refusing to help tho. They're stating they have forgotten the passwords, it looks in some cases the people left anglo a long time ago.

If I was arrested and asked for passwords from a job I was in 18 months I wouldn't know them eithier.

Bob_Latchford

ntlbell wrote: »

They're not refusing to help tho. They're stating they have forgotten the passwords, it looks in some cases the people left anglo a long time ago.

If I was arrested and asked for passwords from a job I was in 18 months I wouldn't know them eithier.

Do you have a link for the "forgotten" defense?

All I can find is unobtainable or refused

A NUMBER of banking officials who left Anglo Irish Bank have refused to reveal 30 encrypted passwords for documents sought by investigators into possible criminal activity at the lender.

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/ex-anglo-officials-refuse-to-reveal-file-codes-136021.html#ixzz16bFhxwTu

ntlbell

Bob_Latchford wrote: »

Do you have a link for the "forgotten" defense?

All I can find is unobtainable or refused

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/ex-anglo-officials-refuse-to-reveal-file-codes-136021.html#ixzz16bFhxwTu

nothing concrete just what I've read in the papers, there doesn't seem to anything offical on "refusal"

If they know the passwords and are refusing to givem them, then I'm in full agreement they should be prosecuted for obstructing the course of justice.

it's a very difficult topic for discussion because we don't have anything concrete to go on.

thebman

ntlbell wrote: »

They're not refusing to help tho. They're stating they have forgotten the passwords, it looks in some cases the people left anglo a long time ago.

If I was arrested and asked for passwords from a job I was in 18 months I wouldn't know them eithier.

If the passwords were protecting documents that were that important, it is unlikely that the passwords would have been left up to being remembered.

They are probably locked away somewhere in the building or have been destroyed already and that is why they have to go to the people that were supposed to remember them.

No way you'd leave it up to people to remember passwords to documents that important in case you ended up with a business need for them and those people had left or forgotten the passwords.

ntlbell

thebman wrote: »

If the passwords were protecting documents that were that important, it is unlikely that the passwords would have been left up to being remembered.

They are probably locked away somewhere in the building or have been destroyed already and that is why they have to go to the people that were supposed to remember them.

No way you'd leave it up to people to remember passwords to documents that important in case you ended up with a business need for them and those people had left or forgotten the passwords.

The problem is proving it tho.

kippy

Look,
We have very little idea of the detail here. ie, what technology is the data "locked with" and who actually "locked" these files.

That isnt in the open yet.

What pees me off is we let Bertie and his ilk off with a "Oi forgot to do me homework judge" excuse. Why wouldnt every criminal in the land get off with the same excuse?
In much the same way as the carry on of our former defence minister WoD, would provide such as shining example to the citizens of this country on how to manage their affairs.
Even IF the government are found to be complicit in major malpractive at Anglo, we've already let them off the hook on tonnes of occasions and probably would on this occasion as well.

thebman

ntlbell wrote: »

The problem is proving it tho.

True but those that should end up being charged afterwards will go far beyond those with the passwords even if they have forgotten them as many more people would have to know where they are stored and the procedures for getting access to them which would be written down somewhere too.

Your looking at probably about 25-50 people at a guess that are involved in someway in trying to avoid giving information about these files.

Thats a lot of people, its very hard to believe not one of these people could be cracked when questioned by the Garda if they wanted to.

kippy

thebman wrote: »

True but those that should end up being charged afterwards will go far beyond those with the passwords even if they have forgotten them as many more people would have to know where they are stored and the procedures for getting access to them which would be written down somewhere too.

Your looking at probably about 25-50 people at a guess that are involved in someway in trying to avoid giving information about these files.

Thats a lot of people, its very hard to believe not one of these people could be cracked when questioned by the Garda if they wanted to.

Again,
We have no idea of what type of data is involved and how it is password protected.

It is perfectly feasible to believe that there is a potential for ONE ONE PERSON to know the password for a specific locked piece of data. See truecrypt. THERE IS NOT A CENTRAL STORE OF PASSWORDS NOR IS THERE AND "ADMINISTRATOR" OVERRIDE.

thebman

kippy wrote: »

Again,
We have no idea of what type of data is involved and how it is password protected.

It is perfectly feasible to believe that there is a potential for ONE ONE PERSON to know the password for a specific locked piece of data. See truecrypt. THERE IS NOT A CENTRAL STORE OF PASSWORDS NOR IS THERE AND "ADMINISTRATOR" OVERRIDE.

I'm not saying that is not possible from a technical point of view, I'm saying its not possible from a business point of view as it would leave the business overly exposed to this one person leaving the company with the password or holding the company to ransom in case of wage negotiations.

maxwell smart

thebman wrote: »

I'm not saying that is not possible from a technical point of view, I'm saying its not possible from a business point of view as it would leave the business overly exposed to this one person leaving the company with the password or holding the company to ransom in case of wage negotiations.

Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier. No business has files password protected without a contingency if that password is lost or the employee goes to a competitor.

swampgas

thebman wrote: »

I'm not saying that is not possible from a technical point of view, I'm saying its not possible from a business point of view as it would leave the business overly exposed to this one person leaving the company with the password or holding the company to ransom in case of wage negotiations.

I agree that for a *normal* above-board business, this would be true. I suggest that the fact that these sensitive documents are not covered by normal business practice means they are encrypted to protect certain individuals rather than the business itself.

kippy

maxwell smart wrote: »

Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier. No business has files password protected without a contingency if that password is lost or the employee goes to a competitor.

How do you stop an employee from taking and encrypting data.............
I am making the point that the employee may well have not being operating with the best "business" contingency in mind............
If they WERE there would be NO issues with retrieving the data. They obviously werent and it is exceptionally difficult from a practical standpoint to stop one employee from using encryption software to encrypt documents they want to encrypt with passwords that are not easily retrieved......

These employees have probably gone against all the corporate rules.....but we wouldnt be in this sh1tter if people had stuck within the corportate rules. It is for breaking these internal policies/rules that they could/should be punished however most appear to have left the organisations.


How many of you here on this post actually work in I.T, and how many have worked in banking institutions (any institutions) because a lot dont seem to understand the technology and/or concepts involved.

kippy

swampgas wrote: »

I agree that for a *normal* above-board business, this would be true. I suggest that the fact that these sensitive documents are not covered by normal business practice means they are encrypted to protect certain individuals rather than the business itself.

What I was trying to get across but couldnt in five times the word count. Fair play.

Dorcha

ntlbell wrote: »

It's very difficult to bring someone to court based on something they've "forgotten"

Trying to prove they haven't forgotten would be nigh impossible

I think a judge could decide - taking into consideration their rate of forgetting passwords at work (and they wouldn't have remained in their positions long if that was the case), the possibiulity of them having forgotten them at such a convienent time and coming to the obvious conclusion. Judges do it all the time where they are asked to decide on two conflicting statements.

Dorcha

ntlbell wrote: »

They're not refusing to help tho. They're stating they have forgotten the passwords, it looks in some cases the people left anglo a long time ago.

If I was arrested and asked for passwords from a job I was in 18 months I wouldn't know them eithier.

If a person left a job where they were using passwords to protect their employer's documents, before they left they would surely be required to deliver up those passwords, so that others could asccess the documents. It seems like common sense that this would be the case.

kippy

Dorcha wrote: »

If a person left a job where they were using passwords to protect their employer's documents, before they left they would surely be required to deliver up those passwords, so that others could asccess the documents. It seems like common sense that this would be the case.

You are missing the point. Read the past few posts.


Just on the judicial question.
Judges base their decisions on evidence. You would be very surprised at how often (anecdotilly) people forget various passwords - forget information in general. We let our politicians off with it all the time.

kaiser sauze

maxwell smart wrote: »

Every system has a backdoor. They need to go to the guys that designed it and get access. I've never come across a system that does not have such a failsafe in a large organisation primarily because people forget their passwords and also for cases where guys get fired or go to a competitor.

Something a bit fishy OR they just havn't thought of this simple idea!

Not every system has a backdoor, what would the point of encryption be?

Bob_Latchford wrote: »

The might also be saying "password" as its easier than "encrypted" for general public.

Still a sorry state of affairs. If the laws exist to prosecute, then use them

If they are only password protected then it is a file ownership issue, easily solved.

Therefore, it has to be encryption.

ntlbell wrote: »

If this was the case why can't any of the sys admins be made provide the details?

They could be the very ones refusing to divulge.

ntlbell wrote: »

It's very difficult to bring someone to court based on something they've "forgotten"

Trying to prove they haven't forgotten would be nigh impossible

That's why we pay judges well.

ntlbell wrote: »

They're not refusing to help tho. They're stating they have forgotten the passwords, it looks in some cases the people left anglo a long time ago.

If I was arrested and asked for passwords from a job I was in 18 months I wouldn't know them eithier.

It was clearly stated on RTÉ and numerous papers that they refused to cooperate.

Dorcha

kippy wrote: »

You are missing the point. Read the past few posts.


Just on the judicial question.
Judges base their decisions on evidence. You would be very surprised at how often (anecdotilly) people forget various passwords - forget information in general. We let our politicians off with it all the time.

There are a couple points in this thread: whether the people in question have forgotten the passwords or are deliberately withholding them, and whether the information can be recovered without the passwords. Which point are you referring to?

On the judicial question -

You're wrong there. I've read plenty of court cases in the papers where no evidence is presented, only hearsay. In general the judge always decides in favour of the versions of events given by gardi above that given by other people, simply on the proposition that the gardi are unlikely to be lying.