← Back to context

Comment by MBCook

4 hours ago

Deleting isn’t destroying?

Sure, but the issue is he didn't delete his data, he deleted a header with a key in it, that's it, just a few MB. He didn't delete hundreds of GB of chats or browsing history, he deleted a key to access it and that key isn't necessarily the only one that can access it. All the stuff they want can still be accessed just fine if another copy of the key exists.

To put it in protective, just opening a web browser or some other app can delete/alter more data than was deleted in this case.

  • These neener neener games don't work in reality. Courts aren't autistic computer systems.

  • That’s semantics. For all intents and purposes he destroyed it, no different than if he stomped on the phone or deleted all the files traditionally.

    I don’t think a judge would care about splitting that hair.

    • Kind of? Let's say he has a detached header on another device and deleted the one on his phone. It's not at all destroyed now. Is what he did still illegal?

      This is important because this is a feature of some crypto systems like LUKS. You can have your header on another physically septate device. If this is ruled on in an insufficiently nuanced way it could have very significant implications for carrying encrypted data without the key.

      1 reply →