665
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
665 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
59207 readers
4075 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not in the USA, but my password is my unique key that in cryptic my data, so therefore an FBI or any other agency is not allowed to pass it even if they could, no? As I’m the person who rode this password and therefore am the copyright holder of that password.
Not sure I understand your point.
What are you talking about?
Courts decide what a creative work is, not your personal attestation. Courts will not decide that your password is a creative work, in pretty much any context. You can't copyright a password.
Using the hash of my artwork as my password for encryption lmfao
Only if the FBI is using rainbow tables of artworks to decrypt your hash I think. /s
As longe as you don’t do crimes …
Is the police allowed to enter your house when needed by law?
Besides this, you are probably replying the wrong post.
You might be thinking of the password vs fingerprint phone unlock. Courts decided that while your fingerprint could be compelled, you couldn't be compelled to reveal your password as that was private knowledge. That isn't due to copyright though, it's a 5th Amendment issue here in the US (The Fifth Amendment grants anyone in the U.S. the right to remain silent, which includes the right to not turn over information that could incriminate them in a crime. These days, those protections extend to the passcodes that only a device owner knows).
We've written plenty of legal justification around it, but ultimately it just comes down to the fact that police CAN physically place your finger into your phone, but cannot extract a password from your brain that you don't want to give up.
If we had the ability to read minds, there'd be legal justification to grab your password within a year.
You can always put your phone into lockdown mode so that the password is required to unlock the phone, not just your fingerprint.
Face and fingerprint unlock is too convenient for me to not have it at all.
That requires me to do it potentially under duress, with little to no time, etc. During a crisis it can't be assumed that the first thing I'll do is lockdown my phone. Anything that requires an anticipatory step is inherently risky.
There are technologies the police are not allowed to use for constitutional reasons. If brain reading was a thing, the 5th amendment would still protect you. Not that they wouldn't try before getting smacked down.