UK Court Rejects Encryption Key Disclosure Defense

truthsearch writes "Defendants can't deny police an encryption key because of fears the data it unlocks will incriminate them, a British appeals court has ruled. The case marked an interesting challenge to the UK's Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which in part compels someone served under the act to divulge an encryption key used to scramble data on a PC's hard drive. The appeals court heard a case in which two suspects refused to give up encryption keys, arguing that disclosure was incompatible with the privilege against self incrimination. In its ruling, the appeals court said an encryption key is no different than a physical key and exists separately from a person's will."

Comments

Re:Huh?

[jimicus]

I wonder if it's illegal now to just forget. "I'd love to help you officer, but I guess I just forgot it!"

IIRC, that's been the case since the RIPA was first proposed. If the police come knocking and say "Give us the key", the burden of proof is on you to be able to show that you can't. (How on Earth you're meant to prove that you can't give them something like that is your problem).

Failure to give them the key can lead to 3 years in prison. There was also talk of a proposal whereby if you discuss the order to hand over the key with anyone, you can get 5 years in prison.

(All of this is based on several-year-old memories from articles in The Register, YMMV, IANAL, OMGWTFBBQ).

Bio scanning a US import

[MosesJones]

I read a while back about mandatory biometric scanning of tourists

I'm really hoping you aren't a US citizen as getting into the US now requires the scanning of all your fingers and of course the answering of the 7 stupidest questions in the history of questioning.

The bio-scanning stuff is a pain in the arse, but its unfortunately not a UK invention, it started in the US for "Security" reasons. You also now have to have a printed out copy of your itinerary (like that would be hard to fake) as an electronic copy on a PDA or laptop just isn't good enough.

Re:I wish the US Supreme Court was that smart.

[radio4fan]

Them claiming that hey dont need it is exactally why it becomes nothing and the court can step all over it like in this instance.

Where are these British people who claim they don't need a Bill of Rights?

In my experience, British people fall into one of three camps:

• Have never heard of the Bill of Rights/US constitution
• Have heard of it and think 'we need a written constitution too'
• Are aware that we have a written constitution

I have never heard a British person claim they don't need a Bill of Rights. I lived in Britain for 37 years.

One of the things that upholds the US constitution is its terseness, saneness, and closeness to the chartering of the national government itsself, although certainly its constant defence is the most critical.

[my italics]

I absolutely agree, and despair at the lack of outrage in Britain. If you could compare the justified anger on the Brits behalf here on Slashdot with the deafening silence in Britain you would be amazed.

If the british in this thread and in general dont respond to such a claim then is it any differnt than them not having a Bill of Rights in the first place?

I responded. I think that is one more person than has claimed that Britain doesn't need a Bill of Rights.

Re:I wish the US Supreme Court was that smart.

[theaveng]

Lucky for us Americans, a subpoena can not force you to testify against yourself. It's a Constitutional right written in black ink and cannot be revoked by any mere subpoena.

Re:Disclosing a key is disclosing knowledge

[seann]

It's too bad there wasn't an awesome program like True Crypt (http://www.truecrypt.org/) that let you have two separate keys for an encrypted volume so that you could give a "fake" key that shows "fake" data.