Slashdot Mirror
ACLU: Lavabit Was 'Fatally Undermined' By Demands For Encryption Keys
An anonymous reader writes "When encrypted email provider Lavabit shut down in August, it was because U.S. authorities demanded the company release encryption keys to get access to certain accounts. Lavabit's founder, Ladar Levison, is facing contempt of court charges for his refusal to acquiesce to their demands. But now the ACLU has filed a 'friend of the court' brief (PDF) in support of Levison, saying that the government's demand 'fatally undermined' the secure email service. 'Lavabit's business was predicated on offering a secure email service, and no company could possible tell its clients that it offers a secure service if its keys have been handed over to the government.' The ACLU added, 'The district court's contempt holding should be reversed, because the underlying orders requiring Lavabit to disclose its private keys imposed an unreasonable burden on the company. Although innocent third parties have a duty to assist law enforcement agents in their investigations, they also have a right not to be compelled "to render assistance without limitation regardless of the burden involved."' Lavabit is also defending itself by claiming a violation of the 4th amendment has occurred."
A corporate employee not liking how he's being used by law enforcement can, as a general matter, simply get up and walk away from the company if he wants.
In this case - Apparently, no, he cannot.
When a court can effectively order you not to close up shop or face contempt, we have slavery for the convenience of the police, in a very real, material sense.
And y'know? I don't feel okay with that.
"Is there a difference between what you can legally be compelled to do and your duty?"
Yes, definitely.
In the same way that "treason" is betrayal of your people and your country, as opposed to failure to obey your government. This is the fundamental failure made by the German people which allowed the Nazis to come to and maintain power.
You have a duty to be honorable and ethical. You have an obligation to do what is legal. They are not the same things.
Non-American here, but I believe that the law that protects a sysadmin's keys is the same law Dick Cheney relied on to protect the combination to his infamous office safe. I understand these laws need to be balanced against people simply obstructing justice, but it's pretty clear and there seems plenty of precedent that what's in your head is protected information. So why don't courts simply dismiss these case with prejudice? Why do they have to drag it on for years, only to come up with the same fucking answer after a couple of million dollars and a handful of shattered lives?
There's something broken with the public prosecution system in the US. It seems to me that prosecutors are basically promoted by comparing how much jail time they have scored in court, rather than their overall cost / benefit to the well being of society. For example a prosecutor who gives a token fine for smoking a joint in public is more valuable to society than one who insists on jail time for all drug offenses.
The appalling US jail statistics are very strong evidence that prosecutors are systematically making the wrong choices.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.