

Police Claim Encryption Use Is Illegal - slashdotaccount
http://cryptome.org/2013/09/police-crypto-illegal.htm

======
rayiner
EDIT: You have to read the complaint in the last link. It sounds like there
were some laptops or something that were "lost" and the owner believed he
stole them, and filed a police report. That's what the charges stem from.

[http://s3.amazonaws.com/InnocentBeyondAReasonableDoubt/PDF/C...](http://s3.amazonaws.com/InnocentBeyondAReasonableDoubt/PDF/Complaint.pdf)

With regards to the allegations of theft, I'm not sure what the author's point
is. He repeatedly says he offered to pay the owner back for the missing items.
Should that mean that he can't be charged with theft? If I steal something and
get caught, should I just be able to offer to pay and avoid prosecution? He
repeatedly says that the missing items amount to at most a civil matter, but
stealing stuff from work is not a civil matter.

For the rest of it, the author doesn't have a leg to stand on. Say instead of
an encrypted partition we were talking about a safe. I kept a safe in my
office, and one day I was summarily fired and escorted out of the building. I
promised that there was no business information or property of my employer in
that safe, then refused to hand over the combination. Should the employer
leave it at that, saying "gee, if he says he didn't put any business property
in the safe, I guess I just have to believe him!"

I can understand where the author is coming from (though his writing makes
that difficult). The owner is clearly being a huge asshole. But the author is
being naive to think that there must be something "fishy" going on.
Unfortunately for him, he's on the wrong end of this story. It's so common for
disgruntled employees to steal company property or damage company property
that nobody is going to give him the benefit of the doubt except the jury, who
is legally required to. The author repeatedly mentions the standard for
conviction (beyond a reasonable doubt). However, that's not the standard for
prosecution, which is closer to "more likely than not."

~~~
shutupalready
> The author doesn't have a leg to stand on. Say,...I kept a safe in my office

The guy writes: "I was an independent contractor. No employer-employee
relationship existed. Federal labor laws afforded me the right to choose when
to work, where to work, how to work and what work I was to produce. There were
no other work-for-hire contracts or specific performance contracts signed and
I did not sign any NDA."

To carry forward with your "safe" analogy: Suppose a plumber came to your
house. When he leaves, you demand to search the toolbox he brought to your
house. Who's in the right here?

~~~
outworlder
My understanding is that the "toolbox" was the client's, not his.

------
furyg3
His timeline and story are all here:
[http://www.innocentbeyondareasonabledoubt.com/](http://www.innocentbeyondareasonabledoubt.com/)

Lesson: Do not ever cooperate with the police.

Bo should have just let the original issue (I'm not even sure what that issue
was) between he and his employer go to a civil court.

~~~
Toenex
_Lesson: Do not ever cooperate with the police._

Seriously? So if I get mugged in the street or if I have my home burgled I
should do what?

~~~
bcoates
Call your insurance company, if you're insured, then get on with your life.

The cops don't have a time machine and they don't give a shit about you
getting mugged or your stuff getting stolen. If you work hard enough you might
get a police report out of them for insurance purposes.

I don't have a good text source lying around but here's a law professor and a
cop explaining the downside:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc)

~~~
elliottcarlson
Not all cops let things slide. Some see it as a job, some get a power trip,
and others take pride in their work.

I've posted this before on HN, but will quickly cover it again; A few years
ago, my wife was at school and (completely her own fault) left her purse in
the class during lunch (this is a medical career school and the class had
about 8 students). That night we received a call from Chase asking about a
string of purchase attempts using one of her cards - which she then realized
was missing. Based on the list of places the card was used, we went to the
stores the following day explaining what happened. Once we had done the leg
work, confirmed that they would have video surveillance during the time the
card was used, we called the police. The officers that showed up went to great
lengths to file the report, work with GameStop, Target and Stop&Shop security
personnel to not only get us to identify the person, but get video evidence of
the crimes at each location. In the end, the classmate who stole the card was
prosecuted and served jail time in two separate counties as well as payment of
damages (small, but still) for the attempted use of the card which got her
nothing in the end. Coincidently, the detective on the case also saw that the
girls mom had a warrant out for her arrest so they picked her up as well.

The experience was very positive from our side of things - and perhaps it's
not the common experience people hear about, but these officers were very
happy to help. As a side note, the county that these officers were in was not
a small, nor "safe" county and it wasn't a matter of them not having anything
else to do at the time.

All that being said, the original advice of not talking, and knowing your
rights should definitely be adhered to if you are on the other side of things.
The way everything was used to aide us, can also be used against you. Not all
police will treat you the same.

~~~
bougiefever
This is a good example of how people should use police services. They were and
prepared, and they did as much of the legwork as they could. The advice to
stay away from the police and to not talk to them when they are soliciting you
is also good advice, but maybe not when taken to the extreme. Imagine if the
shop owners refused to cooperate? It would have been much harder to solve this
crime.

There are some guidelines that I think can help. If you get stopped for a
traffic stop and the cop says he wants to take a quick look through your car,
you should (respectfully) decline. That can lead to nothing good for you. If
you think you might be suspected of a crime (right or wrong), or you don't
know why the police want to talk to you, do not go and meet with them. If you
get arrested, get a lawyer and let him/her deal with talking to the police.
You can talk to the judge if it comes to that.

If they explain that they are investigating a crime and you have some
information or evidence they need, go ahead and help them if you are not a
target.

Just remember, the police are not your friend. They do not care about your
life. They will lie to you and manipulate you if it suits their purpose.
However, they do in fact serve an important function, that you may need them
someday. Use them for their intended purpose. The system is certainly
imperfect, but does work much of the time. I believe the trend towards police
wearing body cameras during every interaction can only lead to good things for
everyone.

------
Spoom
The police are allowed to lie. That's why you don't take legal advice from
them.

~~~
sokoloff
The police aren't attorneys that you are paying for.

 _THAT_ is why you don't take legal advice from them.

~~~
LanceH
Yes, always hire your own professional liar first.

~~~
MayankGoyal
Right. Because "Lawyer" is synonymous to "Liar" and the justice system totally
isn't based on provable facts, but how well you can lie.

------
rmrfrmrf
Something is not right about this story. I can't put my finger on it, but the
holes in Bo's story make me suspicious. What items were lost originally? What
were the circumstances surrounding the lost items? Why wasn't Bo fired
immediately after these items were reported missing? Why is Bo offering to pay
for any lost items, and why does he seem so eager to do so?

Then, as it pertains to the laptop, what the FRICK is Bo doing installing
single user pre-boot authentication on a work computer? That is totally out of
line, and I wouldn't blame the employer for feeling like his computer was
being held hostage by an ex-contractor.

I could see the theft charge in that case. If someone installed password-
protected full disk encryption on my computer and refused to give me the
password, yes, nothing was physically "stolen", but the fact that I'm being
denied access to my own data is more-or-less equivalent.

The fact that Bo then cuts a check to a detective again makes no sense to me.
Why are you paying off law enforcement instead of going through the judicial
system? Don't forget, going to court is also there to protect _you_.

------
justanother
The website isn't exactly presented in a linear fashion, but I gather the
issue is the subject's use of Truecrypt to contain his personal files, whereas
on a company-owned computer, all data therein is company property.

This certainly seems like it should be a civil matter, not something to
involve the guys with guns and blue suits. But more to the point, $21.50 an
hour for a 1099 job for a huge bag-of-dicks of a boss who pirates all his
desktop software? Is that BSA hotline still around, or do they even care about
small fries?

~~~
tomp
> whereas on a company-owned computer, all data therein is company property.

Are you sure? AFAIK, without signing any contracts, all work I produced is
mine, regardless of where it resides. By inference, is all data in my computer
mine as well?

~~~
rayiner
Work created within the scope of your employment automatically belongs to the
company:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=6488654&whence=item%3f...](https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=6488654&whence=item%3fid%3d6488407).

~~~
delinka
"Employment" yes. But how about as an outside contractor and _not_ an
employee. Unless you, the business hiring the contractor, specify that the
contractor is performing a work for hire and that all intellectual property
rights associated with said work shall be transferred to you, the copyright
law says the creator of the work holds the copyright on the work. Under the
law, and with an agreement to receive payment but without stipulations
regarding ownership, I'd say it's fair to assume you (again, the one hiring
the contractor) are obtaining a _license_ to the work, but not to assume that
you will _own_ the work.

~~~
rayiner
Right, if you're a contractor it doesn't automatically belong to your
employer. I think the issue here is an evidentiary problem: we have nothing
other than the author's word that nothing in the encrypted partition belongs
to the business.

~~~
Nimi
Why is that a problem? Wouldn't the burden of proof fall on the employer to
give evidence that something in the encrypted partition belongs to the
business?

~~~
rayiner
First, burden of proof is not a concept that's relevant before criminal
charges or a civil complaint have been filed. You don't need to prove that
there is something in the encrypted partition to bring charges. Circumstantial
evidence is enough.

Second, in an actual trial the author would have to unlock the encrypted
partition. There is no right of privacy against a court. If there is
disagreement about what's in a box, people aren't going to sit around arguing
about burdens of proof and burdens of production. The court is going to order
the box be opened and the issue resolved definitively.

~~~
lightbritefight
Therein is the current question. This is not a box. It is a metaphorical box,
that can only be opened by information. This information is only contained in
the head of the defendant. Say there is something incriminating in the box.
The 5th amendment protects you from being compelled to self incriminate. So,
the court could not legally order the box opened, without providing immunity
to the defendant.

Your reasoning and my reasoning are the current modes of thought about
encryption in a legal context. Neither has been proved correct in that
context.

~~~
rayiner
Right, 5th amendment is an issue on the criminal side (not the civil side),
and the case law is mixed on whether giving up a decryption password is more
like giving up a key to a box (which the court can order you to do), or giving
testimony protected by the 5th.

------
stuaxo
The letter of complaint is a lot easier to digest than going through the site

[http://s3.amazonaws.com/InnocentBeyondAReasonableDoubt/PDF/C...](http://s3.amazonaws.com/InnocentBeyondAReasonableDoubt/PDF/Complaint.pdf)

------
grannyg00se
Putting personal files on an employer's computer is a bad idea. Why do such a
thing?

------
jlebrech
Isn't an exchange of funds admission of guilt?

~~~
R_Edward
No. In a civil case, often a defendant will compare the cost to defend
themselves to the cost of settling, and will opt for the latter, including in
the settlement documentation that the settlement is not an admission of
wrongdoing.

------
JimmaDaRustla
Silly Police!

Next lock boxes and safes!

~~~
fexl
They do hire some ignorant yahoos from time to time.

------
wslh
We are moving back to square one.

