1303589
submission
Comments: 2 +- UK Court Rejects Encryption Key Disclosure Defense-> on Wednesday October 15 2008, @11:50AM truthsearch
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicsecurity.gif); width:59px; height:78px;
security
truthsearch writes "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. 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. 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."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
So many men; so little time.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Actually thats about right (Score:1)
an encryption key, used to store data, IS like a physical key, and if law covers the latter then it should cover the former. Stuff like one-time session keys, well, lets use our common sense here.
Arguing that they are different I believe is similar to trying to patent something that is common sense (ie obvious software concepts). Lets not make silly exceptions because its in software; a principle is a principle and we can't choose how to interpret it based on what personally suits us best.
As much as those
Just go old school with a self destruct key (Score:1)