Hard drive space is pretty cheap. It could easily become routine to have a number of what seem to be encrypted areas, an arbitrary number of which could contain real data or random junk. Given that many people have quite a few gigs of hard drive space unused, someone could easily have ten one-gig “encrypted” partitions, three of which have data. Or maybe four have data. Or maybe only two.

John Conyers, I’m disappointed in you.

The US Customs and Border Protection agency (CBP) has made a (legally enforced) habit of searching all incoming electronics without warrant for “suspicious” files. So far the courts have not ruled on the use of encryption and whether or not you must provide passwords when asked. If (when) the SCOTUS rules that we must warrantlessly provide the keys to locked drawers, electronic or otherwise I still intend on having a “hidden compartment” that only I know about. So, to that end, in a total police state where “interesting” things land you in Gitmo, you would be correct but we are not there yet. When we do get there, secrecy will be your only means of flying below the radar.

Until this country falls to such a state of disrepair, having an encrypted file may mean you have something to hide, but unlike an unencrypted folder named MP3s or MyPhotos, the CBP cannot legally peruse it without a warrant. If nothing else, I want there to be a damn paper trail, and the effort expended on it, when some government bureaucrat wants to snoop through my stuff.

I’m skeptical about TrueCrypt. Not because I don’t think it works, but because the fact that it’s impossible to mathematically prove the existence of the hidden container isn’t worth much.

The kind of nightmare police state that would grab your laptop and search it, find an encrypted volume, and demand that you turn over the password is not going to let you walk simply because they can’t, technically, prove that there’s more data there. They would infer that there is a hidden container because (1) you’re using TrueCrypt, and (2) you gave them the password when they asked. Now you’re going to be sent off to Gitmo until you give them the password to the hidden container. You claim there is no hidden container? Sucks to be you, then.

The only defense in a police state is to avoid drawing attention to yourself. Using TrueCrypt announces that you have something interesting.

Using TrueCrypt is stupid simple, you set up a file with any extension you like of a fixed size. You then activate the encryption on that file so it acts as a “mountable” secure harddisk (you specify the drive letter). You put all of your sensitive data inside the mounted container. When you are done, or the power turns off, the container “dismounts”. Someone investigating your computer may be able to determine that a portion of it has been encrypted and they will most likely find the (de)encryption software but without the proper password they won’t be able to unscramble the data.

Here is the real beauty though, “hidden containers”. When you encrypt a “mountable container” you specify the size from the get go. Then, all of the available space is encrypted so that someone snooping at the file can’t tell if it’s empty, full, or in between. So, what you do is create a second container within the first. Put your real “sensitive” information in the second container and some misleading but not “sensitive” data in the first container, each with it’s own password. If you are coerced(legally or otherwise) into revealing your encrypted data, you only have to reveal the misleading portion of the container and those doing the coercing cannot prove that there is or is not a second container. They have to take your word that the data you are revealing is the only data in the container.

Usual caveats and disclaimers apply and I am not directly linking there but TrueCrypt is opensource and released under GNU. It also works with Win9x, WinNT/XP, Linux and MacOSX. If you don’t feel comfortable with opensource, BestCrypt is a proprietary closed source, pay for use system but it only works with Win9x and WinNT/XP. I am sure there are others out there if you look. Just make sure that whatever you choose supports hidden containers.

What this country needs is on-line voting, and for those rationalizers to have their PC’s seized……just kidding.

After the last flight I took (Houston to Phoenix), that would definitely be an improvement. I’m a big guy, 250lbs, 6’2″ tall, and I was sandwiched into the middle seat of the last row. There was a guy bigger than me on my left, and some poor petite woman in the window seat. I felt sorry for her and tried my best not to encroach on her space, but it’s nearly impossible with those teeny tiny seats.

Now, I find myself dreading a company-paid trip to Europe, because I don’t think I can sit in an airplane for 14 hours.

I won’t even go into the security aspects. That’s been covered enough by others.

I think the US domestic air travel industry is headed for a major crash. I don’t know if that’s good or bad yet.

Meanwhile, those wonderful full-body, let’s-see-you-naked scanners are going into airports.
(http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080610/ts_alt_afp/ustransportaviationsecurity_080610211153)

Ok, so we have to pay through the nose for our tickets and pay for our baggage, and we’re only allowed one carry-on but we can’t have anything in it, and we’re going to be asked to virtually strip before having to sit in uncomfortable, bored silence for the journey, during which we can pay $5 for mini coke and sorry we don’t have any pretzels.

That’s it. I’m just never going to fly again. I spent the first 20 years of my life criss-crossing the oceans several times a year, perfectly safe, comfortable (except for the smoke), entertained, and in the presence of pleasant staff. Remember coming back to the US and the Immigration officer would say, “Welcome home”? Remember applauding the pilot for a smooth landing?

We’re *thisclose* to being told we have to strip naked and lie on a gurney before they sedate us all on the plane.

Do what you want, folks. This is like cavemen fighting shock and awe. The rotters stand no chance. Some people will get hurt needless by these laws, but stastically, we have been 100% free for a few years now. They can’t turn back the clock.

I’ve not seen the specifics of the proposal, but something needs to be done to counteract some of the silliness of the 1976 Copyright Act.

Prior to 1976, if I found a picture that I wanted to use for my web page (for example), I could look for a copyright notice. I could then immediately tell:

-1- If the work was less than 28 years old, it was still under copyright.

-2- If the work was more than 56 years old, it was public domain.

-3- If the work was between 28 and 56 years old, I could check for a renewal record at the Copyright office. If none existed, I could know the work was public domain.

The 1976 copyright act changed all that. Assuming no changes to copyright law, suppose someone in the year 2130 finds a picture bearing the notice “Copyright 1978 John Smith”; despite its obscurity (he can’t find any reference in any machine-readable database) he thinks it would make a great background for his web page. Is there any practical means by which he could ascertain the work’s copyright status?

Please note that I’m being generous in assuming the work even has a copyright notice (not required under the 1976 Act). The person who sees the picture in 2150 would be able to tell that it was 152 years old. But public domain? Probably so, but perhaps not. If John Smith created the work when he was 18, and lived to be 101, that would mean the 70-year clock would have started ticking in 2061. The work would thus still be covered under copyright until 2131.

To be sure, it would be unlikely that the John Smith who created the work in 1978 would still have been around in 2061, but how would one find out?

There is nothing our government does that is not an ebarassment to all things decent and ethical anymore.

to quote Douglas Adams our legislators are “a bunch of mindless jerks who’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes”

What actually happened is that the 7th Circuit denied his motion to stay out of prison while his conviction is on appeal. He likely won’t be in custody until late in the summer due to backlog.

Close your eyes and think of all the groups of people who have been systematically persecuted at some point in history. Ok, now to that list add independent individuals They would be defined as anyone not protected by a lobbying group wealthy enough to buy protection from their elected representatives (at all levels of government).

Not a day goes by without government proving unequivocally that they are just another incarnation of organized crime. My ambivalence toward the “civic responsibility” of voting is largely due to the fact that its only real function these days is to help support the facade of legitimacy that those sociopathic parasites hide behind. And personally, even if you could convince me it’s true, I wouldn’t give a damn that they’re all a bunch of really nice guys with the best of intentions.

Where does something like this leave me?