no more UK for me

[Will Morton]

So 28 days' detention without charge, more CCTV cams than the rest of
the planet put together, stop-and-search without probable cause and
.gov.uk collection of all telephone, email and web headers hadn't
scared you away already? ;o)

The UK has the tightest government control of anywhere in the west,
and has had for a very long time.  It's just that the plutocracy has
been in charge for so long (since 1649, really), and they've been
fairly smart about it; control has been absorbed into the fabric of
society without disrupting anyone [important] too much.

There is most definitely simmering resentment amongst the populace
here, but it's going to have to get a lot worse before anyone does
anything about it.

W


2008/10/16 Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>:
> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;897277082;fp;;fpid;;pf;1
>
> UK appeals court rejects encryption key disclosure defense
>
> Defendants can't deny police an encryption key because of fears the data it
> unlocks will incriminate them, a British appeals court has ruled.
>
> Jeremy Kirk (IDG News Service) 15/10/2008 08:44:00
>
> 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.
>
> Failure to do so could mean a two-year prison sentence or up to five years if
> the case involves national security.
>
> 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.
>
> One of the suspects had been ordered not to move house without permission
> under a terrorism-prevention act. The man defied the order, and he and
> another man were arrested, according to the ruling from the England and Wales
> Court of Appeal Criminal Division.
>
> Police also seized encrypted material on a disc belonging to the first man.
> When the second man was arrested, police saw he had partially entered an
> encryption key into a computer.
>
> 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.
>
> "The key to the computer equipment is no different to the key to a locked
> drawer," the court found. "The contents of the drawer exist independently of
> the suspect; so does the key to it. The contents may or may not be
> incriminating: the key is neutral."
>
> The right against self incrimination is not without bounds, as suspects also
> can't refuse to give a DNA sample if properly compelled.
>
> RIPA, passed in 2000 by the U.K. Parliament, is intended to give police new
> powers to conduct covert surveillance and wiretap operations in respect to
> new communication technologies.
>
> The third part of RIPA concerning the disclosure of encryption keys came into
> force in October 2007. It was delayed since when RIPA was approved, law
> enforcement wasn't seeing wide use of encryption. It was also one of the more
> controversial parts of RIPA, as critics said companies could be at risk if
> law enforcement mishandled their data.
>
> To obtain a key, a so-called "Section 49" request must first be approved by a
> judicial authority, chief of police, the customs and excise commissioner or a
> person ranking higher than a brigadier or equivalent. Authorities can also
> mandate that recipients of a Section 49 request not tell anyone except their
> lawyer that they have received it.