Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Does US law require me to open the door of my house to the police if they have a warrant?"

Its a good question, you are required to co-operate with the authorities in the lawful execution of their job. The term 'lawful' is, of course, subject to legal interpretation.

Police have arrested people for filming them arresting others, typically the scenario is "They ask the person filming to stop while they are doing their job, person doesn't, they arrest them for interfering with an officer." (sister-in-law is a public defender, I get to hear all the excuses). So far the California lower courts are still fumbling around this issue. I expect it to make it to the ninth circuit sometime later this year or early next year.

The question of "Can you make a house that the police can't search without your co-operation?" is a good one, and I'll ask my lawyer friends if that approach has been taken yet. Generally a subpoena is the court ordering you to co-operate and generally you must (or be held in contempt of court).

So I expect such cases would go "give us your hard drive" followed by "give us the key", followed by a refusal, followed by a subpoena, followed by another refusal, followed by being in jail for contempt.

If you did shred your key so that you literally cannot decrypt the drive, then I would expect you to spend a few days in jail (so that the prosecutor could prove to themselves you are serious) and then they would return your drive after re-formatting it. How they would justify that I do not know but I know that they would try.



Intentionally making your data inaccessible (by encryption or otherwise) without a means of recovering it to attempt to prevent it being used against you in court could be considered destruction of evidence. If convicted of that, expect far more than a few days in jail, depending on how annoyed the judge is with you.


But it wasn't evidence when you encrypted it, right?


Typically, you are in trouble when you destroy evidence when you has reasonable cause to believe that it is evidence.

If I delete all of my email today, I'm not committing a crime. But if I find out that my company is being sued for breach of a contract that I was working on, deleting email becomes suspicious.


My attorney has advised me that the best thing in this situation is to have a personal data retention policy: "I delete my email the first monday of every month."

Then, do just that.

If a civil or criminal case is brought against you the law says you must stop any routine houskeeping tasks like that to preserve evidence, but the most you'd have then is 4 weeks worth. Much better than 4 years.


The flip side is I escaped being charged with conspiracy to launder money because I had kept email from several years prior in which I complained at length to my manager about how a particular client was behaving, and then escalated it to his manager. Both managers were implicated, but I could show that I'd reported the behaviour and been reassured by two people who I trusted that nothing illegal was going on.


Actually, I should elaborate: if it were just two people I trusted reassuring me it was fine, I would probably have still been on the hook for contributory negligence. What got me off completely was the fact that the responses I got from the senior manager said that he'd passed all of my information on to the legal team, who'd been over it with a fine-toothed comb and decided it was all above-board. What got HIM in trouble was that he'd never passed it on to legal at all.


Having lost the key for several of my spare drivers in the closet... How can that power abuse you describe be avoided on innocents?


Explain to the jury that you lost the key before you knew there was a criminal investigation. It only becomes illegal afterward.


don't they only have access to my stuff AFTER they showed probable cause.

does not make much sense to me...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: