How Long to Crack an 'Encrypted' HD?

brainburger asks: "In the UK, Tony Blair has recently lost a parliametary vote to allow the police to hold terrorist suspects for 90 days without trial. One of the justifications the police gave for the extension from 14 days to 90 days was that they need the extra 76 days to decrypt the computer hard-drives of suspects. This has been seen by some as the only compelling reason to allow 90 days. The time-limit has been extended to 28 days instead, but Tony Blair insists 90 days is required. Are there really any encryption systems that cannot be cracked in 28 days, but which can be cracked in 90? Aside from the not-much-discussed issue that the police can no longer interrogate a suspect after they are charged, I suspect the police meant unencrypted machines. What do you think?"

Comments

Re:Pardon the obvious...

[myowntrueself]

A man is (supposed to be) innocent until proven guilty.

I think that Tony Blair would take issue with that.

Which is why I wouldn't go back to the UK except to help in the revolution.

Re:How about Safehouse?

[-brazil-]

This way of thinking, while reminiscent of methods used by many of History's most reviled tyrants such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao, is nevertheless effective at reducing the capabilities of an ideologically motivated enemy.

Except that it isn't. Obviously you "reduce the capabilities" of the people you actually have in your camps. But you also increase the number of people willing to replace them - by a much larger amount. Guantanamo and the war in Iraq are the best aids for the terrorists' cause they could have hoped for.

it is because we are so dedicated to freedom, equality, and the pursuit of happiness that we are willing to fight those who would enslave us.

What a load of unmitigated piffle. Many of the actions of the US government clearly show a total lack of any respect for freedom, equality or the pursuit of happiness of anyone except themselves and their campaign contributors.