SecretSoftware wrote:For the last time. I am not talking about after a warrant is issued. I am however, talking about the process of issuing the warrant, from a legal stand point against an encrypted file, which is a closed system.
What would make the police suspect that an encrypted file contains something illegal, hence to use that to get a warrant?
Because she's an animal rights activist with a history of computer abuse: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7102180.stm and so her computer was siezed. She is not just some random person.
Suppose someone is walking with a bunch of paper containing highly classified information. Amidst these papers , the police finds an encrypted DVD. The police here has reasonable suspicion that the encrypted DVD contains other highly classified information. Based on this "circumstantial evidence", they can get a warrant from a judge.
If they believe him to be holding files which are cruical to a criminal investigation, and can persuade an independant Judge that this is the case, then yes, they can confiscate the evidence and demand that he provides a mechanism by which the files can be made intelligable (i.e. give up encryption keys). If a warrant is issued and the man refuses to do so, he can be held in contempt of court which is an imprisonable sentence. Note that this is no extention of current police powers, since the police cannot sieze his unencrypted papers without a warrant either.
But suppose the same individual, is walking with only the DVD in their DVD player. What gives the police the right to ask for a warrant?
Is its simply because the DVD is encrypted?
If the police have a warrant they can confiscate the DVD and the DVD player. They would need to have a warrant to do so. This would require them to persuade an independant Judge that there is a reasonable probability of wrongdoing which is also subject to a judicial review.
How do you know if this law is being abused, just like police abuse their use of "teasers" on people.
Alice and bob live in a system, where cryptography is essentially rendered useless and outlawed[appeal to emotion].
Only if the police can persuade the police that there is reasonable probability that either Alice or Bob are doing something illegal. At which point, surely this is reasonable legislation. Bear in mind that the Judge is independant of the police, and thus obtaining a warrant is a very formalized affair.