Police Blotter: Laptop border searches OK'd]
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net> Date: July 28, 2006 2:11:45 PM EDT To: dave@farber.net Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net> Subject: Can you be compelled to give a password? [was: Police Blotter: Laptop border searches OK'd]
In the UK, it is a crime under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 not to disclose a password, encryption key, session key, or plaintext when required to do so by law enforcement. This applies both to end parties in the communication, and intermediates (such as telecommunication companies). Note that some people have been known to perform a risk assessment, and have elected the milder penalty associated with refusal to disclose, rather than face the harsher penalties that come with conviction of the crime that led to them being the target of investigation. I have a feeling the the Police and Justice bill 2006 has some further measures planned in this direction, but can't cite references at the moment.
Seems there might be some 'self-incriminatory' arguments here. Perhaps even an "unreasonable search" argument. But IANAL.
Kind Regards, Jonathan Care Director, The Security Practice Ltd. Tel: +44 (0)845 123 5413 Email: j.care@securitypractice.com Skype: jonathancare ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as eugen@leitl.org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]