[IP] Can you be compelled to give a password? [was:

Jonathan H. Care j.care at securitypractice.com
Fri Jul 28 03:02:01 PDT 2006

Police Blotter: Laptop border searches OK'd]

>From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick at ianai.net>
>Date: July 28, 2006 2:11:45 PM EDT
>To: dave at farber.net
>Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick at 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

>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 at securitypractice.com
Skype: jonathancare

You are subscribed as eugen at leitl.org
To manage your subscription, go to

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]

More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list