- the onus is on _you_ to "prove" that you don't know it or have forgotten it - you can be told not to reveal that you've told them the password
Anyone administering systems might want to think about this, governments aren't known for good security.
Yes, because the Overton window has slipped so far, we are in a situation now, that in the 1970s people would easily class as a police state. Mass Internet surveillance, with complete dossiers on every web user being compiled by GCHQ, the criminalization of possession of data, which is a thought crime, yes prison for possessing certain books that are legal in the US. The list goes on and on.
All supposedly to protect us from some minor threat, whatever is in vogue as the latest moral panic (e.g. terrorism, child pornography, petty harassment, etc.). All while so many more people are killed or harmed in road traffic accidents each year than from all of those combined.
It really is nothing but excuses for authoritarianism. Yes, fascism, in disguise there. I don't even want to imagine what things will be like in 20-30 years time for now, if it continues at this rate.
So they wouldn’t charge you based off a random anonymous tip off. It would more be, a naked child was found in your house and now they’re charging you for not giving them the tapes with the videos on it.
Use malware to actually install sharing software and hide it from the user and at the router. Then use actual full-disk encryption software and make a real hidden partition and dump the bait files from the file sharing into it and leave the forensic traces. Then wipe the malware and delete the password and the FDE is unopenable but the courts will never believe the user.
You then aren't breaking the rules, as far as I can tell. Of course you can't give them something that is only available in another country, where those laws would not hold up.
Hitting a panic button would mostly likely qualify as evidence tampering, disruption of investigation, or evasion of justice.
This is a good reason to use numbered, pre-made, one-time-passwords and require a reason when using them. "AdminX lost fob - using override to reset creds." Requiring you to lie is one step past requiring you to remain silent.
If the 'next PW to be used' number increased on everyone's override-PWs it couldn't be hidden. Co-admins could know to check an audit log of changes.
Come again? I don’t catch the meaning of this.
- the onus is on _you_ to "prove" that you don't know it or have forgotten it
- you can be told not to reveal that you've told them the password
So for example, you can be instructed not to tell your accomplices that their security is now compromised because every secret you had is no longer secret.