Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Police Need 90 Days To Crack Hard Drives

Posted by Zonk on from the they'll-get-better-with-practice dept.

Twyko64 writes "The UK police may need 90 days to hold terrorist suspects because it takes that long to crack a suspect's PC hard drive." From the article: "Combining the analysis, the translation and second stage analysis, add inter-country co-operation and interview strategy formation, and from the police point of view, the existing 14 days is inadequate and 90 days doesn't look excessive. Another factor is encryption sophistication. If 256-bit triple-DES or similar techniques are used then decryption could require supercomputer-levels of cracking."

4 of 693 comments (clear)

  1. One more reason.... by IbeUID0 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    To only allow encryption systems with well-known backdoors to hit the commercial world. Reserve the military grade stuff for those aligned with governments dedicated to goodness and niceness, not badness and evilness, like the U.S. government.

    Oh wait. Make that Canada. Nobody distrusts the Canadians. Except for Sheriff Bud B. Boomer.

    Canadians - they walk among us.

  2. No crime? No time! by dada21 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The police should not be able to hunt for evidence. A search warrant's sole purpose is to retrieve specific data (gun) from a specific location (bedroom).

    We're living in a terrible police state. In my opinion, a crime should only be investigated by detectives when someone has been violated.

    To me, talking about blowing up a train is no crime. Actually blowing it up is, but the victims must bring charges against the perpetrators. I'm sick of "The People versus" cases.

    Terrorists who blow themselves up need no trial. Property owners have the sole responsibility to protect their property, not the cops.

    All these laws are ridiculous. Even drunk driving is a non-crime.

  3. Re:They're really going to hate it when... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    even with completly knowledge of the algorithm it should be computationally infeasible to determine a secret message is implanted in the cover text.

    Uh, oookkaay. So you're telling me that if I can capture a script that shows how to perform a series of operations on the image to reveal the steganography (or perhaps a program that extracts a file based on a particular spacing of bits), you're telling me that the algorithm I captured is useless?

    That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
  4. Re:90 days, eh? by DavidTC · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Irish-related convictions?

    Is that anything like the old charge of 'Being Willfully and Persistantly a Negro' in the US?

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?