I’ve been waiting to see a US precedent concerning forcing a suspect to divulge encryption passwords. The UK passed the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) in October of 2007 which provides for a two year imprisonment for failure to produce an encryption key regardless of any other charges. The RIPA has been used once against an animal rights activist. Now, a Vermont judge has ruled that, under the Fifth Amendment, a suspect cannot be required to produce evidence including an encryption key. Here is some interesting blog commentary by an attorney.

This is a particularly interesting case in a couple of ways. First, officials opened his laptop and started poking around as he was being processed at a Canada-United States border crossing. Second, it brings up some interesting questions concerning rights of accused. The particular crime he is accused of, possessing “animation depicting adult and child pornography”, is one that inspires extreme emotional reactions, it seems. People then tend to forget why the Fourth and Fifth Amendments were included in the Bill of Rights, namely that American citizens weren’t protected by the Magna Carta and searches and seizures illegal in England were commonplace in the colonies.

Of course, if Bruce Schneier is right, the government may be trying to place a backdoor in new encryption standards to avoid this sort of mess. It wouldn’t be the first time, though. See the clipper chip, or mandatory key escrow. I’m sure this isn’t over, but it’s a nice turn of events.

Tags: encryption, free, freedom, security

This entry was posted on Sunday, December 16th, 2007 at 1:08 pm and is filed under Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.