News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Police raid Gizmodo editor's house by evgen on Monday April 26, 2010 @06:26PM (#1296400)
It does not remove the ability of law enforcement to serve a search warrant and carry your computers out the door, nor does it remove the ability of a judge to plant you in a jail cell until you cough up the passwords. What it does do in create an incentive for anyone who does serve a search warrant upon you to look very, very closely at the contents of the drive once you do provide the password -- if you thought the inconvenience of full-disk encryption was this important then they are likely to think that they will find some child porn or tax evasion documents buried in there somewhere.
Re:Police raid Gizmodo editor's house by jrockway on Monday April 26, 2010 @06:38PM (#1296447)
nor does it remove the ability of a judge to plant you in a jail cell until you cough up the passwords

It's true, encryption doesn't remove this ability. The reality is that the Constitution never provides this ability in the first place, and specifically prevents the government from passing any law that would provide this ability.

Refusing to testify against yourself (without a grant of immunity, anyway) is not a crime, it's your right.

Re:Police raid Gizmodo editor's house by sethg on Monday April 26, 2010 @11:15PM (#1297098)
The unencrypted contents of your hard drive constitute evidence, not testimony.