[cryptography] US Appeals Court upholds right not to decrypt a drive

Kevin W. Wall kevin.w.wall at gmail.com
Sat Feb 25 18:18:54 EST 2012


On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:50 AM, Jon Callas <jon at callas.org> wrote:

[snip]

> But to get to the specifics here, I've spoken to law enforcement and
> border control people in a country that is not the US, who told me
> that yeah, they know all about TrueCrypt and their assumption is
> that *everyone* who has TrueCrypt has a hidden volume and if they
> find TrueCrypt they just get straight to getting the second password.
> They said, "We know about that trick, and we're not stupid."

Well, they'd be wrong with that assumption then.

> I asked them about the case where someone has TrueCrypt but doesn't
> have a hidden volume, what would happen to someone doesn't have one?
> Their response was, "Why would you do a dumb thing like that? The whole
> point of TrueCrypt is to have a hidden volume, and I suppose if you
> don't have one, you'll be sitting in a room by yourself for a long
> time. We're not *stupid*."

That's good to know then. I never had anything *that* secret to protect,
so never bothered to create a hidden volume. I just wanted a good, cheap
encrypted volume solution where I could keep my tax records and other
sensitive personal info. And if law enforcement ever requested the password
for that, I wouldn't hesitate to hand it over if they had the proper
subpoena / court order. But I'd be SOL when then went looking for a second
hidden volume simply because one doesn't exist. Guess if I ever go out of
the country with my laptop, I'd just better securely wipe that partion.

-kevin
--
Blog: http://off-the-wall-security.blogspot.com/
"The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree,
is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals.
We *cause* accidents."        -- Nathaniel Borenstein



More information about the cryptography mailing list