PDA

View Full Version : Protect your computer data from the government for free.




Rael
03-04-2009, 11:05 PM
Imagine some government thugs bust down your doors one night, for whatever reason. Or imagine any scenario when the government winds up confiscating your computer.

Now, imagine that the government computer guys can't access your data. So they forward it to the FBI's best computer forensics team. What do they find? Zip. Nada.

Won't they just shit bricks? And won't you be sitting there laughing?

This has already happened. Ask alleged pervert Sebastian Boucher. I'm posting the story below.

Ah, but I'm not doing anything wrong, you say! Suppose you have books on your computer that tell you how to do illegal things. Suppose you are wrongly accused of some of those things, and the government uses the fact that you have the materials on your computer to bolster their bogus case in front of a jury.

TrueCrypt is a free program that gives you military grade encryption suitible for top secret data, with algorithms that so far have never been broken. If you choose whole disk encryption, everything you do on your computer that touches your hard drive is encrypted. As soon as your computer is off, without the password, your data is safe. And it does this without slowing your computer down a bit.

http://www.truecrypt.org/


JOHN CURRAN

Associated Press

February 8, 2008 at 4:06 PM EST

BURLINGTON, Vt. — When Sebastien Boucher stopped at the U.S.-Canadian border, agents who inspected his laptop said they found files containing child pornography.

But when they tried to examine the images after his arrest, authorities were stymied by a password-protected encryption program.

Now Boucher is caught in a cyber-age quandary: The government wants him to give up the password, but doing so could violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by revealing the contents of the files.

Experts say the case could have broad computer privacy implications for people who cross borders with computers, PDAs and other devices that are subject to inspection.

“It's a very, very interesting and novel question, and the courts have never really dealt with it,” said Lee Tien, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based group focused on civil liberties in the digital world.

For now, the law's on Boucher's side: A federal magistrate here has ruled that forcing Boucher to surrender the password would be unconstitutional.

The case began Dec. 17, 2006, when Boucher and his father were stopped at a Derby Line, Vt., checkpoint as they entered the U.S.

Boucher, a 30-year-old drywall installer in Derry, N.H., waived his Miranda rights and cooperated with agents, telling them he downloads pornography from news groups and sometimes unknowingly acquires images that contain child pornography.

Boucher said he deletes those images when he realizes it, according to an affidavit filed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

At the border, he helped an agent access the computer for an initial inspection, which revealed files with names such as “Two year old being raped during diaper change” and “pre teen bondage,” according to the affidavit.

Boucher, a Canadian with U.S. residency, was accused of transporting child pornography in interstate or foreign commerce, which carries up to 20 years in prison. He is free on his own recognizance.

The laptop was seized, but when an investigator later tried to access a particular drive, he was thwarted by encryption software from a company called Pretty Good Privacy, or PGP.

A grand jury subpoena to force Boucher to reveal the password was quashed by federal Magistrate Jerome Niedermeier on Nov. 29.

“Producing the password, as if it were a key to a locked container, forces Boucher to produce the contents of his laptop,” Niedermeier wrote. “The password is not a physical thing. If Boucher knows the password, it only exists in his mind.”

Niedermeier said a Secret Service computer expert testified that the only way to access Boucher's computer without knowing the password would be to use an automated system that guesses passwords, but that process could take years.

The government has appealed the ruling.

Neither defence attorney James Budreau nor Vermont U.S. Attorney Thomas Anderson would discuss the charge.

“This has been the case we've all been expecting,” said Michael Froomkin, a professor at the University of Miami School of Law. “As encryption grows, it was inevitable there'd be a case where the government wants someone's keys.”

Authorities have encountered such dilemmas before, but have used other methods to learn passwords, including installing surveillance devices that capture keyboard commands. Sometimes investigators have given up before a case reached the courts.

In a 2002 case, the FBI used a keyboard program to obtain gambling records from the computer of Nicodemo Scarfo, Jr., the son of a jailed New Jersey mob boss.

In another case, an officer found child pornography on the laptop of a man who flew into Los Angeles International Airport from the Philippines. But a federal judge later suppressed the evidence, ruling that electronic storage devices are extensions of the human memory and should not be opened to inspection without cause.

That case didn't hinge on a password, though.

Orin Kerr, a law professor and computer crime expert at George Washington University, said the distinction that favours the government in Boucher's case is that he initially co-operated and let the agent look at some of the laptop's contents.

“The government can't make you give up your encryption password in most cases. But if you tell them you have a password and that it unlocks that computer, then at that point you no longer have the privilege,” he said.

Tien, the attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said a person's right to keep a password secret is a linchpin of the digital age.

Encryption is “really the only way you can secure information against prying eyes,” he said. “If it's too easy to compel people to produce their crypto keys, it's not much of a protection.”

idiom
03-04-2009, 11:15 PM
It doesn't get me my computer back.

Rael
03-04-2009, 11:19 PM
It doesn't get me my computer back.

True. Might as well let them have all your personal data along with the $500 computer :rolleyes:

zach
03-04-2009, 11:26 PM
so as long as I don't say, "I have the password, and you can't have it," I'm safe?

idiom
03-04-2009, 11:35 PM
TrueCrpyt hides the fact that the data is there.

In fact you can have a hidden protected drive inside a visible protected drive so you can give them the keys to the non-incriminating safe.

Rael
03-04-2009, 11:37 PM
so as long as I don't say, "I have the password, and you can't have it," I'm safe?

I would say, "I have the password, and FUCK YOU, you can't have it!"=)

Rael
03-04-2009, 11:38 PM
TrueCrpyt hides the fact that the data is there.

In fact you can have a hidden protected drive inside a visible protected drive so you can give them the keys to the non-incriminating safe.

Yeah that's if you use the hidden mode. I think it's called plausible deniabliity encryption. So if someone forces you to reveal the password to the drive, if you also have an encrypted volume inside that drive, they won't be able to tell.

idiom
03-04-2009, 11:40 PM
Yeah that's if you use the hidden mode. I think it's called plausible deniabliity encryption. So if someone forces you to reveal the password to the drive, if you also have an encrypted volume inside that drive, they won't be able to tell.

Its more, they torture you for days until you give up the first password. Then they shoot you and never discover the real information.

pcosmar
03-04-2009, 11:48 PM
I suppose it would depend on how sensitive or incriminating the information is.
I have nothing of use to them on my computer.
I would tell them "Fuck You" just cause.

But I have looked into and played with Truecrypt some. It is nice but it cannot encrypt whole Linux partitions yet. Least last time I looked.
It was on the "to do" list

unconsious767
03-04-2009, 11:56 PM
If you do use truecrypt, for the love of god make frequent password protected backups of the encrypted drive. My encrypted drive just got hosed, and since it's encrypted you can't access things like system restore.

The more hoops you make your data go thru, the more likely it is to become corrupted. So plan ahead. You've been warned. That said, I'm still going to use truecrypt :)

edit>> apparently some backup software won't give you a viable backup with encrypted data. I use Acronis True Image 8.0 and it worked, although after restoration, the drive would no longer require a password to enter it.

Rael
03-05-2009, 12:31 AM
If you do use truecrypt, for the love of god make frequent password protected backups of the encrypted drive. My encrypted drive just got hosed, and since it's encrypted you can't access things like system restore.

The more hoops you make your data go thru, the more likely it is to become corrupted. So plan ahead. You've been warned. That said, I'm still going to use truecrypt :)

edit>> apparently some backup software won't give you a viable backup with encrypted data. I use Acronis True Image 8.0 and it worked, although after restoration, the drive would no longer require a password to enter it.

TrueCrypt requires you to burn a rescue disk that can be used it cases like this. It will of course, be another step to go through before you can reinstall windows, etc.

I backup my data by making it into rar files, which can then be placed in a true crypt volume and burned to a disc encrypted.

Rael
03-05-2009, 03:42 PM
bump

Zippyjuan
03-05-2009, 04:01 PM
Nothing on my computer that they would even care about. What about you?

Mini-Me
03-05-2009, 04:07 PM
Nothing on my computer that they would even care about. What about you?

There may be nothing on your computer they'd care about, but in these days of extremely broad laws and selective enforcement, it's extremely unlikely they wouldn't be able to find anything that they could use as an excuse to put you away, if they were really intent on doing so.

...that said, nobody's going to care about putting you away anyway, because it doesn't seem like you've ever once said anything "out of line" with respect to the political establishment. I think a few of the more outspoken people around here are, well...markedly more inconvenient in the eyes of the government. ;)

Rael
03-05-2009, 09:11 PM
Another reason to do this, is that when you die, your family and freinds are going to have your stuff, and they will find your massive collection of porn on your pc. Do you really want your grieving mother to open up your computer to find "Strapon Midget Fuckers Vol. 7"?

Mini-Me
03-05-2009, 09:16 PM
Another reason to do this, is that when you die, your family and freinds are going to have your stuff, and they will find your massive collection of porn on your pc. Do you really want your grieving mother to open up your computer to find "Strapon Midget Fuckers Vol. 7"?

...it sounds like you have some weird interests. All of those gross-out polls are now starting to make a little more sense. ;) You do make a very good point in general, though.

Austin
03-05-2009, 10:48 PM
Another reason to do this, is that when you die, your family and freinds are going to have your stuff, and they will find your massive collection of porn on your pc. Do you really want your grieving mother to open up your computer to find "Strapon Midget Fuckers Vol. 7"?

Porn Buddies (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNPQavXwUf0&eur)

tpreitzel
03-06-2009, 12:07 AM
A much better alternative is to always place "sensitive" data on small, removable media which one always carries on his person. Even if you're stopped, it's easy to permanently destroy any "sensitive" data in seconds. As removable media becomes smaller and smaller, this option becomes more and more viable. Removable backups of such media could easily be stored where no one would be able to find them. The need for local encryption decreases with technological advancement. However, communication links need encrypting which is one of the reasons why government loves and promotes RF (easily intercepted). Optical (IR) communication links are the securest.