1 / 10

Encryption

Explore the importance of encryption to protect sensitive information from unauthorized access, delve into legal aspects such as the Fifth Amendment, and understand the implications of providing passwords in court cases.

dluoma
Download Presentation

Encryption

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Encryption “[Encryption is] really the only way you can secure information against prying eyes. If it's too easy to compel people to produce their crypto keys, it's not much of a protection.” --Tien, attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation Dissenting:In a court case, individuals should not be forced to provide passwords to decrypt and access files relevant to the case. Charlie Koba, Nicola McEldowney, Carol Lee, Serena Qiu

  2. Terms Encryption: The process of converting information into a form unintelligible to anyone except holders of a specific cryptographic key. Decryption: The act of restoring an encrypted file to its original state through the use of a key. Cryptography: Transforming information into an enciphered, unintelligible form using an algorithm and a key; the art or science of keeping messages secret, deals with all aspects of secure messaging, digital signatures, electronic money, and other applications Fifth Amendment: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

  3. Hoffman vs. United States Declared that “the privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction . . . but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute.” Meaning that under the Fifth Amendment, a defendant doesn't have to give testimony that can incriminate himself, but he also is not required to give any testimony which could lead to evidence against himself. A computer password is testimony that could be linked to evidence that would incriminate the defendant and is therefore protected under the Fifth Amendment. Quote from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=341&invol=479

  4. Privacy is Protected by Law The spirit of American law is built to provide the maximum freedoms for an individual until their actions infringe on the freedom or well-being of others. Therefore, unless it can be proven that the withholding of the password will actually cause harm to others, the defendant should not be required to reveal it.

  5. The Boucher Case Suppose you have assigned one password to all your private documents. By divulging your password in court as Boucher was told to do, you could ostensibly be providing the password to your bank account, school or work files, or other sensitive documents which might have nothing to do with the article(s) under fire.

  6. The Boucher Case Articles about the case suggest that, per the Fifth Amendment, Boucher had already relinquished his rights by showing the police the computer in the first place. However, the Fifth Amendment states that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". Boucher did not provide the border police with his password. Therefore, he had not already incriminated himself, which is what invoking the amendment seems to suggest he did.

  7. The Boucher Case Another debate the Boucher case has touched off, being the first of its kind, is that of whether a password constitutes material or merely an "idea". In rejecting the subpoena to make Boucher say the password, judge Jerome Niedermeier made the point that "the password is not a physical thing. If Boucher knows the password, it only exists in his mind" and therefore should not have to be produced like a tangible key. Quote from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/tech/main3804858.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3804858

  8. Other contents in Z Drive • The government has only seen and knows about SOMEof the files • Z Drive may have had other incriminating materials • What does your Z Drive have? (ex. music, movies, software, etc.) • Whether illegal or not, the contents in Z drive must have been encrypted for some personal reasons- protection of privacy.

  9. Password is NOT tangible • Only existing in one’s mind (cannot be physically seized and documented) • Dangerous precedent of gov. having access to our thoughts and minds • One could easily say that he has forgotten the password while another provides the password and thus punished--how would this be justified?

  10. Resources http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=341&invol=479 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/tech/main3804858.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3804858 http://www.pgpi.org/doc/pgpintro/ http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9834495-38.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Boucher http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment05/

More Related