I know a shocking amount of innocent people who have been target of surveilance and criminal investigations or who even had their homes raided - in western european countries. Thankfully the courts are still working as they should, and all but one were fully acquitted.

It can happen if you are a political activist in any fashion. Nothing violent, just speaking out for rent control and against gentrification can get you in trouble. Or hanging around with the wrong people.

When it happens, you want to leave them as little rope as possible to hang you with. As I said, the courts still are honest and they won't make up evidence, but they will take everything they can find to make a case - and to learn about your structures and networks while they are at it.

You are right, that in real oppressive regimes all bets are off. If they want to get you, they won't stop at their own laws. But even then, these techniques are useful against industrial espionage. If you are doing business in certain countries, the "evil maid" is quite real...

This is a somewhat pessimistic outlook on humanity, first off I would say that those who are most commonly at risk are those with trade secrets. Patented tech and investment intel for example.

As for the dissenters, I’m sure they would appreciate their co-conspirators remain secret.

> This is a somewhat pessimistic outlook on humanity, first off I would say that those who are most commonly at risk are those with trade secrets. Patented tech and investment intel for example.

Can you provide any evidence at all of police or "thugs" (or anyone, really) kicking down doors to get at trade secrets being a common problem? Because there are countless news articles of police raids seizing computers to stop child porn[0].

I speculate any tool billed as "anti-forensic" will be used for immoral purposes more commonly than moral purposes.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Fogle#Child_pornography_...

It is an absolute certainty that any tool to improve privacy and security is going to be used by malicious actors.

That does not mean it should be banned. Knives are used for many things from cutting food and opening boxes to killing people. Nitrate based fertilizers can be used for vastly improving crop yields but can also be used for bombs. Encryption can be used to protect your sensitive personal data from criminals and prying eyes, but can also be used by the criminals themselves to hide their activities.

No state (even if it was the most ethically illuminated utopia) has the power to protect every person in every place at every time. Banning defensive tools is asinine as rarely does it mean that a criminal won't use them against you.

That is a dangerously naive viewpoint - trusting that the only instances are the ones they proudly brag about? When they have been caught not even allocating all of the funds for Child Pornography prevention they have been allocated while using "the children" as an excuse to undermine cryptography?

It is doubly foolish to believe that the police are the only users of forensic software when there is credit card theft and multmillion dollar ransomware rings out there. Robbing a bank by force or by heist is foregone jail but snatching a laptop from a banker? Far more petty in risk and disguised as mere property theft as opposed to the data theft.

The threat model in corporate espionage is absolutely one of theft of property. It’s a lot easier to steal somebody’s laptop than to hack it.

Suspected child pornographers. There was some concern that the door kicking had gone too far on too little evidence once it reached Cliff Richard.