Man jailed over computer password refusal (UK)

Nod

Nod

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 22, 2005
Messages
10,968
Reaction score
2,715
Location
Darling
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831
A teenager has been jailed for 16 weeks after he refused to give police the password to his computer.

Oliver Drage, 19, of Liverpool, was arrested in May 2009 by police tackling child sexual exploitation.

Police seized his computer but could not access material on it as it had a 50-character encryption password.
Click to expand...
Officers are still trying to crack the code on the computer to examine its contents.

Det Sgt Neil Fowler, of Lancashire police, said: "Drage was previously of good character so the immediate custodial sentence handed down by the judge in this case shows just how seriously the courts take this kind of offence.

"Computer systems are constantly advancing and the legislation used here was specifically brought in to deal with those who are using the internet to commit crime.

"It sends a robust message out to those intent on trying to mask their online criminal activities that they will be taken before the courts with the ultimate sanction, as in this case, being a custodial sentence."
Click to expand...
 
They were investigating child sexual exploitation, which is fair, but I would have thought that they would have needed a court order in any case to search someone's personal property?
 
Nod said:
They were investigating child sexual exploitation, which is fair, but I would have thought that they would have needed a court order in any case to search someone's personal property?
Click to expand...

Hence they must have further evidence that implicates Drage in order to convince a judge to sign that court order.
 
No Court Order.... no password,

I think I'm going to have to find something that has 2 passwords... 1 to use the system.. and if i give you the other 1, it completely destroys the data...
 
B.O.F.H. said:
No Court Order.... no password,

I think I'm going to have to find something that has 2 passwords... 1 to use the system.. and if i give you the other 1, it completely destroys the data...
Click to expand...

http://www.rohos.com/2010/03/most-wanted-portable-data-encryption-tool/
Second Password

Users want to have a second password that opens ‘Another’ files (specially created beforehand) . There are many situations where you cannot refuse to reveal your secret data (for example, due to your company order). In this case instead of entering real password you can enter ‘Second’ password that will be accepted also.

This feature also called plausible deniability. It saves you from revealing your actual sensitive data and making to believe you have actually nothing important (illegal) in your protected volume.
Click to expand...
 
The_Assimilator said:
Whatever happened to the right to privacy? Big Brother truly is watching us, and twisting our arm as in this case.
Click to expand...

Huh? How do you the police did not have sufficient grounds in this case ?

Nod said:
They were investigating child sexual exploitation, which is fair, but I would have thought that they would have needed a court order in any case to search someone's personal property?
Click to expand...

Maybe they got one or are in the process of getting one.

If the man is innocent and would like to prove it, just hand over the password.
 
From the quoted BBC news item:

He was formally asked to disclose his password but failed to do so, which is an offence under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, police said.
Click to expand...
 
blunomore said:
If the man is innocent and would like to prove it, just hand over the password.
Click to expand...


The last time I checked a person was innocent until proved guilty. In the UK the onus is on the Crown to prove guilt not on the suspect to prove innocence.

Surely not giving a password is much the same as "I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself" US 5th amendment.

I think that a problem in the UK is that they do not have a constitution enshrining rights, except the ignored Magna Carta.
 
Truecrypt does the whole "hidden volume" thing. Enter password 1, get your kiddie pron. Enter password 2 get your normal pron.
 
Perhaps they charged him for contempt of court? I don't see how they could possibly charge him on evidence they don't even fully possess. Simply having ISP records is not evidence since you may be on a shared or compromised wireless connection?
 
Billy said:
The last time I checked a person was innocent until proved guilty. In the UK the onus is on the Crown to prove guilt not on the suspect to prove innocence.

Surely not giving a password is much the same as "I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself" US 5th amendment.

I think that a problem in the UK is that they do not have a constitution enshrining rights, except the ignored Magna Carta.
Click to expand...

No !

Read MickZA 's quote:
He was formally asked to disclose his password but failed to do so, which is an offence under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, police said.
Click to expand...

I hope his ass gets hauled off to jail.
 
blunomore said:
No !

Read MickZA 's quote:

I hope his ass gets hauled off to jail.
Click to expand...

Correct he was guilty of not disclosing his password, and sentenced under the legislation. However the police still don't have the password and he still does not have to give it to "Prove his innocence" If the police have not managed to bring a case on the original charge after 18 months they obviously don't have the evidence.

Incidently I believe that it is the principle that is at stake here, not the offence.

Bear in mind that just because "It is the Law" does not make it right. Given South Africa's past that should be pretty obvious.
 
Billy said:
Correct he was guilty of not disclosing his password, and sentenced under the legislation. However the police still don't have the password and he still does not have to give it to "Prove his innocence" If the police have not managed to bring a case on the original charge after 18 months they obviously don't have the evidence.

Incidently I believe that it is the principle that is at stake here, not the offence.

Bear in mind that just because "It is the Law" does not make it right. Given South Africa's past that should be pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

How you do what grounds they had - or did not have - to investigate him to begin with?
 
It seems a little stupid to me, to live in a society that aims to take all necessary steps to protect children whilst at the same time allowing child porn to hide behind a veil of "privacy".
It should be a case of:
- Can the police provide reasonable grounds of suspicion?
- If so, a court order must be issued, failing to react to the court order results in a life sentence being imposed.
Of course, things get tricky as all heck when the suspicious person is a juvenile.
And, what happens if you actually cannot access your password any more, life sentence because you accidentally deleted your email with the key in it. LULZ!
 
If police pitch up at your place with a search warrant you cannot deny them access. They can search through your underwear drawer if they want to. Same principle applies here IMO... If they have followed the necessary procedures and have all the documentation, we have to assume they want to access the malaka's data for a reason and have every right to do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X