4 ms·
Francis Rawls is still in jail after 2 years for not decrypting his hard drive. He's in contempt indefinitely until he decrypts the drive.
by killaken2000 8y ago
Francis Rawls is still in jail after 2 years for not decrypting his hard drive. He's in contempt indefinitely until he decrypts the drive.
- someone7x 8y agoReminds of that guy in The Crucible that gets crushed with rocks for refusing to take part in the witch trial.
- brennebeck 8y agoI do believe you mean Giles Corey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giles_Corey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giles_Corey
- b1r6 8y agoHowever, that's a unique case, because the authorities know the hashes of the cleartext files on his machine match the hashes of illicit media. "Foregone conclusion" so long as you believe in the mathematics behind hash collisions.
- 77pt77 8y agoHow can they possibly know that? If that is the case then there should be no problem convicting him.
- sandworm101 8y agoThey had access to the drive at one point. In a filesharing seneario it is common for feds to see what you got before the raid that grabs the physical drive.
- KingMachiavelli 8y agoIn the file sharing scenario, how would the feds know that the encrypted drive actually has the files? They can only know what they suspect is on the drive.
- sandworm101 8y agoIt isnt about absolutes. They can be reasonably certain that the drive was in use on a network.
- lagadu 8y agoEither what they have is enough for a conviction or it's not. If it is, then there's no need to actually get access to it, if it's not then it might as well not exist.
- justadudeama 8y agoI don’t understand this. Are the hash values stored somewhere unencrypted?