According to this story on CNet A Minnesota appeals court has ruled that the presence of encryption software on a computer may be viewed as evidence of criminal intent. Regardless of the other facts in the case (the man was clearly guilty, and was convicted on testimony of his victim) this appeals court ruling is a bit distrubing.
Apple’s OS X comes with a file-encryption tool called File Vault which is at least as secure as the PGP software that this guy was using. As a certified geek, with at least three different encryption tools installed on my system (not to mention the built in Encrypted File System provided by Windows XP), I find the Judges’ ruling to be luddite in the extreme. In this case, the man clearly had criminal intent, but there is no mention of actually finding encrypted files (I use OpenPGP on all my personal mail to “sign” it so people can know it came from me, but there’s no “encryption” involved) they simply ruled that the mere existence of encryption technology on his computer shows he’s a bad man.
Actually, this is seriously bad news for anyone interested in freedom of speech. I consult for several organizations that send volunteers, relief workers, and missionaries into what we refer to as “creative access” countries. That is: countries where they are allowed in because they are relief workers, or because they have language or tech skills that are need, but where they are either not allowed to practice their Christian faith, or at least are not allowed to proselytize (that is, to tell others about their faith). People going into such situations almost always ask about encryption: they want to be able to send emails home without fear of harrasment or persecution by government agencies that might be monitoring communications. Generally, I tell them it’s not a bad idea, but to keep in mind that oppressive regimes might consider encryption itself a sign of malicious intent. Apparently, that warning now applies to the state of Minnesota.
Similar Posts:
- None Found