MI State Police Using Cell phone 'Extraction' Devices?

[Ron-Solo]

Depending on the case, if they had enough PC for a warrant, you could be compelled to give up the password.

Sorry, not true. You still have 5th Amendment protection. That would be like saying you must confess if they have a warrant.

People, quit stressing over this one. Accessing cell phone info is only done in substantial cases where there is probable cause. I have seen it done several times, and EVERY time a warrant was issued based on probable cause. 95% of the cases involved murder investiagtions, and the other 5% involved major narcotics cases.

[jdberger]

Depending on the case, if they had enough PC for a warrant, you could be compelled to give up the password.

How can I be compelled to give up something I completely forgot? The trauma of an unlawful search and all that?

"What's the password"

"What password?"

"The password for your phone?"

"It doesn't have a password."

"It's asking for one right here."

"Hmm... It's never done that before."

ad nauseum.....

[bohoki]

if they can download anything off my tracfone i'll give them money to make a copy for me

those things are locked up pretty tight

[G1500]

How can I be compelled to give up something I completely forgot? The trauma of an unlawful search and all that?

"What's the password"

"What password?"

"The password for your phone?"

"It doesn't have a password."

"It's asking for one right here."

"Hmm... It's never done that before."

ad nauseum.....

"All I have to say is 'If you break it, you buy it'".

[G1500]

There were attempts to do that, and Cisco, for example, got caught in a scandal where it left a backdoor in their IOS at the behest of the FBI. However, if a government can use a backdoor, so can hackers, and in that particular example that's how the whole thing came out. So that pretty much killed the idea.

Also, don't forget that a lot of encryption algorithms (and a lot of software using them) are created abroad. A lot of it is also open source, where a lot of people get to look at it (and most of whom aren't the most government-worshiping types, to put it mildly).

So, in general, you're pretty safe from backdoors using this kind of software. Just make sure to use well-known software, as by the virtue of being well-known it's subject to greater scrutiny, and read up on it before using it (to see what issues with it came up).

Hmm, now that I think of it... Hey Gene, is there a backdoor in PGP? That's ok, you, can tell us, we're all friends here

I do not believe PGP has a backdoor. It is said there may be a backdoor in the most recent releases, but supposedly there are versions that have been declared as "Safe". But who knows. I used to use Steganos, now I use Securstar and True Crypt. There are thoughts on open source software being easier to crack since the source code is available, but I believe that well known open source software is under greater scrutiny from its users, and that exploits will become well known if they are discovered; unlike proprietary software that will hide the fact that something is wrong until it is corrected, at which point it is brushed under the rug.

I know several years ago, hushmail and cyber-rights email providers forked over a few CD's with users' emails from their "private, secure free email accounts".

This is how my sensitive emails get sent these days:

rTL4jWbwv9nXIDYAIxpRNxKqd3nfrroAyTWWzWXnmVZzfCMhHy K0CS8pBKqTCW6nXEydczAZISGquxnXu3eu6W2v2KPricZfCn+3 YvLkS6LqnlCtDCLJRr6fbCXHpKZdGfNAzxnrHWgM8QbnQEQ7dT cSLNjGs+gwh4jdiVSLJ7QietKS6TWSRYhLsTO+r9ESATSPMJKa 6Jx15lq9bCMmZNKhgm6ne4Kumg5MsAwX1Ka8W6Twu6/evbQl04Qkq82FCgnr83zemAJpfP//z3x+6g+MPzAemjTqrU73W3x9h08MPgs/bHGBa5lNp49ND6SXs7WfUxb4CiwMgHwRNFonEw==

[Kodemonkey]

I do not believe PGP has a backdoor. It is said there may be a backdoor in the most recent releases, but supposedly there are versions that have been declared as "Safe". But who knows. I used to use Steganos, now I use Securstar and True Crypt. There are thoughts on open source software being easier to crack since the source code is available, but I believe that well known open source software is under greater scrutiny from its users, and that exploits will become well known if they are discovered; unlike proprietary software that will hide the fact that something is wrong until it is corrected, at which point it is brushed under the rug.

I know several years ago, hushmail and cyber-rights email providers forked over a few CD's with users' emails from their "private, secure free email accounts".

This is how my sensitive emails get sent these days:

I feel you can only trust the open source stuff. But for the truly paranoid you need to compile it yourself. Just because they give you the source code doesn't mean the compiled version doesn't have a backdoor. Just keep up with Truecrypt and the updates. I like the ability to encrypt it with AES, then Serpent then twofish. Also, the hidden volume within the normal volume gives you plausible deniability as long as the header key can't be cracked.

[Falconis]

Is there a question in any of this or just your usual random griping?

[G1500]

I feel you can only trust the open source stuff. But for the truly paranoid you need to compile it yourself. Just because they give you the source code doesn't mean the compiled version doesn't have a backdoor. Just keep up with Truecrypt and the updates. I like the ability to encrypt it with AES, then Serpent then twofish. Also, the hidden volume within the normal volume gives you plausible deniability as long as the header key can't be cracked.

That is basically my opinion.

Anything I have stored isn't really that important. Won't get me in trouble with anyone but the girlfriend. lol

[SparrowHanger]

Sorry, not true. You still have 5th Amendment protection. That would be like saying you must confess if they have a warrant.

People, quit stressing over this one. Accessing cell phone info is only done in substantial cases where there is probable cause. I have seen it done several times, and EVERY time a warrant was issued based on probable cause. 95% of the cases involved murder investiagtions, and the other 5% involved major narcotics cases.

I don't think the 5th protects you. Giving up the password to a cell is like turning over a key to a locked filing cabinet. You are not giving evidence againast yourself but surrendering evidence.

[Samuelx]

Is there a question in any of this or just your usual random griping?

psst... ignore...

[DesertGunner]

Sorry, not true. You still have 5th Amendment protection. That would be like saying you must confess if they have a warrant.

People, quit stressing over this one. Accessing cell phone info is only done in substantial cases where there is probable cause. I have seen it done several times, and EVERY time a warrant was issued based on probable cause. 95% of the cases involved murder investiagtions, and the other 5% involved major narcotics cases.

I think you're right about the password. My bad. Although a warrant is not always necessary, under many circumstances the phone can be searched incident to arrest, depending on the crime.

[G1500]

I don't think the 5th protects you. Giving up the password to a cell is like turning over a key to a locked filing cabinet. You are not giving evidence againast yourself but surrendering evidence.

You are never required to give your password away. If they want in, they will have to get in themselves.

Now, if you have an encrypted volume with fake information inside something, with a hidden container inside, or have a fake login for something, by all means, feel free to give up your password.

[puRe59]

While it's possible to break 256-bit AES encryption (which is what I have on my phone and all of my computers), no PD I can think of can afford or has access to that kind of processing power, not to mention that it would take quite some time for them to break it even if they had the access to said processing power. At which point enough time has passed for you to turn into dust, anyway.

Just make sure your key/password is over 10 characters.

A 168-bit key would take around 5.9 x 10^30 years using today's computing power. Hehe....imagine over 200-bit key.

Regarding the encryption don't the writers of the encryption code aren't they compelled to give the gov't the back door to the code (the algorithm)? Seems like i heard this somewhere.

The best algorithms are public. And most of the ones that are well-known do not have backdoors. A backdoor is simply a way to cutdown computation possibilities. The power of the encryption comes from the key, more so than the actual algorithm(assuming algorithm doesn't have backdoors).

Just thought I would share, I'm taking a computer networks security class

[Falconis]

psst... ignore...

Sorry I had a can of gasoline and no where to go

[SparrowHanger]

You are never required to give your password away. If they want in, they will have to get in themselves.

Now, if you have an encrypted volume with fake information inside something, with a hidden container inside, or have a fake login for something, by all means, feel free to give up your password.

I don't doubt you are right and I was wrong. I will try to be more circumspect as my crim law experience is pretty well limited to some aspects of federal securities law and my training is nearly ancient. Now that I have time to think, compelling one to turn over a password is akin to provideing the address where evidence is located. LE can seize evidence if they can locate it, but they cannot force one to divulge its location.