
Man jailed until he unlocks encrypted hard drives in child abuse images case - king_phil
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/23/francis-rawls-philadelphia-police-child-abuse-encryption
======
PhilWright
The article implies that he definitely knows the password to unlock the drives
but chooses not to do so. In that case it seems reasonable that you can put
someone in jail until they comply, because you know that they can comply
should they choose to do so. I assume he is thinking that the judge will have
to let him go eventually, and the time he will have served will be less than
the jail time imposed for the material that would be found on the drive. He
might be wrong in the calculation!

It would have been more interesting if he had claimed to have forgotten the
password. Even though no one would believe he had really forgotten it, you are
then placing someone in jail indefinitely until they do something that they
claim is impossible to comply with.

Can you jail someone for refusing to comply with a request that is not
possible for them to comply with? I would suggest it is not moral to do that.

But the fact everyone knows he really can comply, but you cannot prove that he
can comply, adds the interesting complication.

------
king_phil
Looks like one of the best DoS vectors against a person: just hide an
encrypted drive in his house and produce one or two people who claim to have
witnessed he/she a) saves illegal files on that drive and b) knows the
password. Boom, person gone forever.

