Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Decrypt Personal Data — What Does That Mean For You?

Besides, why bother. The Gov't can look you up on Google now.

Background checks will NOT help! People have to be EDUCATED on the AGENDA and WHO the ENEMY is. Most JUDGES are J E W S or crypto J E W S. If people don't know what a CRYPTO J E W is or how to spot one, then a background chdck will NOT help.

The LEGAL SYSTEM is THEIRS -- based on the UCC/international law, which of course has its roots in the Babylonian Talmud. They CREATED IT, and they CONTROL IT.

People *MUST* understand these basic FACTS first, and -- with all the PC crapola -- all I can say is GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

I wouldn't trust that if you have something to hide. A nice 3lb steel mallet would sure do the trick.

Most folks don't have the contents of their personal hard drives dumped onto the internet.

You are PARTIALLY correct.

What you said about TRUE LIBERALS is correct! But "PROgressives" are NOT true liberals! They are globalists and neolibs.

Chris Hedges is a TRUE, or CLASSICAL LIBERAL (one of the few remaining, I might add).

There are a plethora of PROgressives, too many to name here. The difference between a PROgressive and a CLASSICAL LIBERAL is like night and day!

Wouldn't it be crazy if before an PC/IP connected to the Internet that the host would need to allow to government full access to HD before and potentially afterwards.

Just a thought

This 'decision' won't stand...

If it is real at all...

I guess you will find out soon enough.

The computers, complete with hard drives, that Mitt Romney gave (or sold real cheap) to his state employees when he left the Governship of Massachusetts.

The fact that the developers are anonymous just adds another level of security in my book. If it was developed by a corporation within the commonwealth regions including the US, the developers would cough up backdoor keys quite easily under a subpoena. So one needs to use common sense here, if truecrypt had backdoors, its developers would not be hiding. If in fact truecrypt was a high level setup to give high end users a false sense of security, it would still stay anonymous for these small level jurisdictional cases even for embezzelment.

The judge is wrong. the Fifth Amendment was written for protection against just this kind of abuse.

Most likely 1 to 5 in the pen.

hypocrites

it's time they stop feigning correctness to a world who knows them as anything but... just whom do they believe they are fooling I wonder?

we will read their minds and we won't need billions of dollars worth of equipment we stole from others to do so either. I guess it's the weak and inept who need to cheat and steal just to measure up eh?

then they will come to know how weak, small, and powerless not to mention stupid they are and have been. it has been witnessed and shall be given as testimony upon the world stage. open book. closed case.

the blessings will be... and if you have none, so be it.

I mean progressives. Pro-statists.

The scum of the Earth.

^ Nailed it ^

There is at least one freeware encryption/decryption program that gives you "plausible deniability", if used correctly.