nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Give us your password or go to jail!

[Deleted User]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831

Man jailed over computer password refusal

Oliver Drage was ordered to serve 16 weeks at a Young Offenders Institution on Monday
A teenager has been jailed for 16 weeks after he refused to give police the password to his computer.
Oliver Drage, 19, of Liverpool, was arrested in May 2009 by police tackling child sexual exploitation.
Police seized his computer but could not access material on it as it had a 50-character encryption password.
Drage was convicted of failing to disclose an encryption key in September. He was sentenced at Preston Crown Court on Monday.
Drage, was arrested when he was living in Freckleton, Lancashire, but later moved to Liverpool.
He was formally asked to disclose his password but failed to do so, which is an offence under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, police said.

Is the stuff on your computer worth going to jail for?

or more seriously do you have the right to privacy!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

stepbar

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831

or more seriously do you have the right to privacy!

Not if you have kiddie porn on it you don't.... :mad:

Who the hell puts a 50-character encryption password on their PC unless they have something to hide?

Under A Funeral Moon

Good enough for the filthy b@stard.

ottostreet

no, for potential child porn cases, or suspected paedophiles, their computers should be accessible to police.

mikemac

16 weeks, he did the right thing....from a legal point of view

He probably knew full well if he gave the password he would be convicted of something a lot more serious.
Clearly he has something to hide

ottostreet

I would have thought that running the hard drive as a slave drive, on another system would allow access to data.

doesnt specify whether it was an operating system password, or drive password

holystungun9

Under A Funeral Moon wrote: »

Good enough for the filthy b@stard.

Suspect yes, but a little quick off the mark to label him as you have?

starbelgrade

holystungun9 wrote: »

Suspect yes, but a little quick off the mark to label him as you have?

Par for the course for the AH rabble.

tuxy

ottostreet wrote: »

I would have thought that running the hard drive as a slave drive, on another system would allow access to data.

doesnt specify whether it was an operating system password, or drive password

Sounds like 128 bit hard drive encryption, a OS password would be easy to bypass once you have physical access to the PC.

Under A Funeral Moon

holystungun9 wrote: »

Suspect yes, but a little quick off the mark to label him as you have?

If he had nothing to hide, he should have gave them the encryption password. Why else run the risk of going to prison? Serves him right. If he's found innocent in the future, I'll gladly take back my previous comment.

minidazzler

stepbar wrote: »

Not if you have kiddie porn on it you don't.... :mad:

Who the hell puts a 50-character encryption password on their PC unless they have something to hide?

ottostreet wrote: »

no, for potential child porn cases, or suspected paedophiles, their computers should be accessible to police.

OK then, I'm a cop, lads ye are suspected of having child pornography on your computer. What's your password?

Unless they have some pretty damning evidence, I would give noone access to my computer or my drives. The british police notoriously arrested thousands a few years ago because their credit card numbers showed up on a server in america where child porn was purchased, (over simplifying here), most had done nothing wrong at all, but they were still publicly arrested, you don't shake off accusations like that!

Under A Funeral Moon wrote: »

If he had nothing to hide, he should have gave them the encryption password. Why else run the risk of going to prison? Serves him right. If he's found innocent in the future, I'll gladly take back my previous comment.

That's the cop out that George Bush used for the Patriot act, innocent people have nothing to fear. I call bullsh1t! Innocent people have everything to fear these days!

Paddycrumlinman

ottostreet wrote: »

I would have thought that running the hard drive as a slave drive, on another system would allow access to data.

doesnt specify whether it was an operating system password, or drive password

That's what I was thinking but he may of had some software like lojack which encrypts the hard drive if removed.

Sanjuro

My password is passw.... oh shit!

[Deleted User]

ottostreet wrote: »

I would have thought that running the hard drive as a slave drive, on another system would allow access to data.

doesnt specify whether it was an operating system password, or drive password

Done a bit of PC forensics myself in the past, it's most likely that he used a whole disk encryption application.

There are many who rebel against this type of intrusion just to defend their right of privicy even if there is absolutly nothing incriminating there.

If there is any serious evidence to leading to him; re child porn, then that can be used instead of the refusal to provide a password.

In other words charge him with that crime and give him the opportunity to "open the PC" and clear himself or for be charged with withholding/destroying evidence.

minidazzler

Deleted User wrote: »

Done a bit of PC forensics myself in the past, it's most likely that he used a whole disk encryption application.

There are many who rebel against this type of intrusion just to defend their right of privicy even if there is absolutly nothing incriminating there.

If there is any serious evidence to leading to him; re child porn, then that can be used instead of the refusal to provide a password.

In other words charge him with that crime and give him the opportunity to "open the PC" and clear himself or for be charged with withholding/destroying evidence.

Is it not up to the cops to prove guilt? Simply not allowing access is not an admission of guilt, I wouldn't tell a cop my name if asked on the street when I was just going about my business. Never mind letting one look at my computer, I have nothing to hide, but just like my privacy!

CrazyRabbit

stepbar wrote: »

Who the hell puts a 50-character encryption password on their PC unless they have something to hide?

People who value their privacy. People who have sensitive business information. People who may have something that whilst not illegal, could be embarrassing or cost them their job/family etc. Hell, I use 20+ character encryption purely because I fear my PC & Laptop being stolen and information about me being used to steal my identity.

There are so many legally and morally right reasons for using encryption and maintaining privacy. It's your civil and human right to have privacy.

And I don't agree with forcing people to incriminate themselves in a potential crime. There are laws against this in many countries, and for good reason.

As for whether or not it's worth doing jail time by not handing over the password...well, that depends. If what's on the computer is illegal and could result in a 10 year prison sentence, then I guess it's better to stick with a few weeks in prison for not handing over the password.

[Deleted User]

minidazzler wrote: »

Is it not up to the cops to prove guilt? Simply not allowing access is not an admission of guilt, I wouldn't tell a cop my name if asked on the street when I was just going about my business. Never mind letting one look at my computer, I have nothing to hide, but just like my privacy!

Exactly! first rule of criminal law in the UK is "lnnocent untill proven guilty*".

*exceptions apply, unfortunately this list is growing!

Einhard

minidazzler wrote: »

Is it not up to the cops to prove guilt?

No, its not. It's up to a court, and a judge or a jury. People are over simplifying here. The police didn't kick his door down, ransack his house and terrorise him. They would have needed a warrant to gain access to his computer. The same as they would when entering someone's property. Why exactly should a computer be classified as more private than one's house, and therefore off limits to court sanctioned searches?

Jesus Wept

stepbar wrote: »

Not if you have kiddie porn on it you don't.... :mad:

Who the hell puts a 50-character encryption password on their PC unless they have something to hide?

It doesn't mean what they are hiding is illegal.
It'd be better if more people had 50-character encryptions than 'password1' and 'qwerty'.

limklad

tuxy wrote: »

Sounds like 128 bit hard drive encryption, a OS password would be easy to bypass once you have physical access to the PC.

Windows users passwords are easy to crack in less than a minute once you have access to the computer and the right software which is freely available.

btard

The-Rigger wrote: »

It doesn't mean what they are hiding is illegal.
It'd be better if more people had 50-character encryptions than 'password1' and 'qwerty'.

Omg. How did you find out my password? :eek:

minidazzler

Einhard wrote: »

No, its not. It's up to a court, and a judge or a jury. People are over simplifying here. The police didn't kick his door down, ransack his house and terrorise him. They would have needed a warrant to gain access to his computer. The same as they would when entering someone's property. Why exactly should a computer be classified as more private than one's house, and therefore off limits to court sanctioned searches?

It's up to cops and prosecutors to PROVE guilt. It's up to Judge and jury to decide if the person is guilty.

I don't think that a computer should be more private, but it's getting very easy for the police to get warrants for computers.

IP addresses aren't good sources for probable cause I think, they can be spoofed fairly easy these days!

I would love to know what evidence the police had in this particular investigation.

mikom

At a guess.......... Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch

58 letters though.

limklad

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831

Is the stuff on your computer worth going to jail for?

or more seriously do you have the right to privacy!

Identity Thief and Yes you do have a right to Privacy.

I have heard some members of the Gardai laughing about x, y and Z who were neighbours of mine and were not been investigated just because one original tenant in the house is a bad egg and they use that information about what in their Rented house in order to embarrass others to give information about the suspect that they knew very little about. They should be charged for breach of privacy of others not related to the case. It is a major problem when the Gardai enters a rent house shared by number of different Tenants who were strangers to each other. The original Tenant was been investigated before they move in. They been in the house 2 weeks when their stuff was taken by the Gardai. They took computers from everybody even though they had the warrant for one individual computer belonging to the original tenant and publicly (loud verbally) release information about one person sexuality and sexual bondage habits when he discovered items in a drawer who was not involved in any crime to embarrass information out of him about the reclusive original Tenant. The Gardai then suggested loudly that the others were also involved in child bondage sex games also within earshot of their new neighbours.

minion35

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

People who value their privacy. People who have sensitive business information. People who may have something that whilst not illegal, could be embarrassing or cost them their job/family etc. Hell, I use 20+ character encryption purely because I fear my PC & Laptop being stolen and information about me being used to steal my identity.

There are so many legally and morally right reasons for using encryption and maintaining privacy. It's your civil and human right to have privacy.

And I don't agree with forcing people to incriminate themselves in a potential crime. There are laws against this in many countries, and for good reason.

As for whether or not it's worth doing jail time by not handing over the password...well, that depends. If what's on the computer is illegal and could result in a 10 year prison sentence, then I guess it's better to stick with a few weeks in prison for not handing over the password.

If the banking sector took note and improved encryption on their laptops it would help a lot. Although I would be a supporter of privacy to a certain extent if their is a criminal matter such as child porn full authority must be given to the police.

minidazzler

minion35 wrote: »

If the banking sector took note and improved encryption on their laptops it would help a lot. Although I would be a supporter of privacy to a certain extent if their is a criminal matter such as child porn full authority must be given to the police.

Yeah, but that means that police can say they are looking for child porn on anyones computer. There have been huge blunders before for that sort of thing, I wouldn't like police seizing my computers under that pretence because people will believe it and then when I am proven innocent, they won't recall that fact, only that I had my computers taken for kiddie porn!

SugarHigh

minidazzler wrote: »

Yeah, but that means that police can say they are looking for child porn on anyones computer. There have been huge blunders before for that sort of thing, I wouldn't like police seizing my computers under that pretence because people will believe it and then when I am proven innocent, they won't recall that fact, only that I had my computers taken for kiddie porn!

Exactly it also wouldn't be hard for them to charge you for kiddy porn because what is actually considering porn in Ireland is surprising. I've heard that any women dressed up to appear underage is also illegal so that would include any porn where an adult wears a school uniform.

fergalr

The responses of some of the posters here are terrifying.

Under A Funeral Moon wrote: »

Good enough for the filthy b@stard.
...
If he had nothing to hide, he should have gave them the encryption password. Why else run the risk of going to prison? Serves him right. If he's found innocent in the future, I'll gladly take back my previous comment.

Hey, you don't mind if the police put cameras in your bedroom and shower, do you? We've no evidence, but we think you might be committing a crime.

If you disagree, we'll jail you. But I presume you won't object if you are innocent. After all, why run the risk of going to prision?

Anyway, if you object to it, you are clearly a 'filthy b@stard'. (If you are found innocent in future, I'll gladly take back my previous comment).

...

I don't know whether this guy is innocent or guilty, but we should presume innocence. Maybe they guy is just paranoid about privacy. Some people are. Maybe he's gay and thinks being gay is a terrible thing (some people are pretty mixed up,or have strange beliefs), and doesn't want anyone to know what he has written in his diary. Maybe he has some other secret he wants to keep private that is in no way criminal, but he just doesn't want anyone to know.
You don't know these things...

Amalgam

stepbar wrote: »

Not if you have kiddie porn on it you don't.... :mad:

Who the hell puts a 50-character encryption password on their PC unless they have something to hide?

Rented accomodation with lousy security.

Quite probably using: http://www.truecrypt.org/

KevinVonSpiel

Look, it's not like the authorities would ever use this law to suppress/oppress anyone.

We're talking about the UK here, for G_d's sake!

pwd

limklad wrote: »

Windows users passwords are easy to crack in less than a minute once you have access to the computer and the right software which is freely available.

The only software you need is Windows itself