SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Encryption tools that keep your digital communications hidden from prying eyes are becoming more widespread, and Canadian police say they need a law that compels people to hand over their passwords so cops can access those communications.
The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP), a lobbying organization with membership from across the country, passed a resolution at its annual conference on Tuesday mandating that the group advocate for a law that would force people to provide their computer passwords to police with a judge's consent, CTV reported.
"To say this is deeply problematic is to understate the matter," said Micheal Vonn, policy director for the BC Civil Liberties Association. "We have all kinds of laws that do not compel people to incriminate themselves or even speak."
A law that compels people to give police access to their devices, which may contain messages, photos, and data that have nothing to do with any active criminal investigation, doesn't fit within Canada's current legal landscape and would be "tricky constitutionally," Vonn added.
"I'd question whether this proposal is constitutional," said Tamir Israel, a lawyer for the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa.
"It's rare to force people to help police investigate themselves, and for good reason," Israel continued. "It shifts the focus of criminal condemnation away from actual criminal activity and onto compliance. So if an individual legitimately objects to handing over their password, that alone makes them criminal."
[...] "This has been a standard component of what the chiefs of police do—they argue for laws that would make policing easier," Vonn said.
"But is it a good idea from a civil liberties perspective? No."
(Score: 3, Informative) by juggs on Monday August 22 2016, @01:35AM
This has been in force in the UK for many years now as part of The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), Part III. Up to 2 years in the big house for not revealing a password to police.
In fairness, they do have to provide some form of evidence that supports their view that the password is being withheld rather than forgotten - last access / modified times on files being a dead give away for one.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by fnj on Monday August 22 2016, @03:14AM
No, file access and modify times are not a giveaway. You can never prove that someone knows something but will not reveal it. It isn't possible. It's always possible that George knew the password last Thursday but does not remember it now. He may have written it down and burned the paper since. Anyone who pretends that it is possible to know the contents of George's brain is either mistaken or a filthy corrupt liar. All you can do is convince a kangaroo court judge, who will then blatantly subvert justice by locking up the victim for contempt.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @08:08AM
Brits are disarmed, there's nothing they can do about it: just how women want it.
(Score: 2) by juggs on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:47AM
I agree - unless George states he knows the password and then refuses to reveal it. There have been very few convictions under this particular legislation (as in single figures). I get the impression that judges on the whole are not particularly favourable toward it, but that's just my impression, I'm not aware of any speaking out and saying so explicitly.
Picky detail, those few locked up are not locked up for contempt of court, but for the specific offence of not revealing the password as legislated in RIPA.
Maybe the police just wave it around to 'encourage' people to remember their passwords during the bluffing phase. I really have no idea and hopefully I never find out personally - might do some reading on the few cases that have ended up with convictions though.