What does that have to do with being in possession of data at a checkpoint? It pretty obvious an ISP cannot be held responsible for transport of data the same way a patch cord manufacturer cant be. Also there is a big difference between being arrested and being convicted. And the issue here is less about being arrested and more about whether the “care, custody and control” of encrytpted information can legally cross borders unimpeded.
I think this is all nonsense. I believe it has been mentioned earlier that there is already TONS of encrypted and proprietary data on any device at any given time. Most of the files on your device right now are someone elses (created by someone other than you).
No one is every going to be stopped and asked what a program’s proprietary/encrypted code on their device means. This is unreasonable and no regular human could ever be convicted for having this data.
This would be akin to you getting thrown in jail for having malware on your device because you should have known what is was and now you are liable for its actions…you should have known how it worked, how the data was transferred, where the data in the malware was being sent and who it was being sent to. This idea is crazy.
Granted SAFE isn’t malware but no one is held to a standard of knowing exactly how each line of code in their software operates.
6 Likes
You cannot make that claim. The Patriot Act in the USA wields some pretty amazing powers. And you think because a file is encrypted the Border agent wont say "give me the key or we sieze you device? I want to see you go through a border and tell them you have an encrypted file and they cannot read it.
Here are some reports that help understand whats going on. Nothing here about requests for decrytng files but m sure they exist since Snowden.
“Of the more than 340 million people who traveled across the US border in 2011, about 5,000 had laptops, cellphones, iPods, or cameras searched.”
EDIT: add
The answer is, “Yes”, the Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA”) can ask for your passwords. Not only can the CBSA ask for your passwords, the CBSA does ask for passwords. Not only does the CBSA ask for passwords, the CBSA will unlock your cell phones, mobile phones, smart phones, computers, etc and look at/review your emails, your photographs, your videos, your text messages, etc. If you do not provide your passwords, you could be arrested and charged and end up with a criminal record. Just ask Mr. Alain Philippon.
That percentage is incredibly small (we might as well be talking about how to prevent yourself from being hit by lighting since there is a better change of that), and are we talking about government policy in general or SAFE?
Does it suck that they can do this? Yes.
Can SAFE or any other company for that matter do anything to avoid it?..not really.
Is the possibility of this being a major issue for encryption in the future grounds for worry?..not for me to say but my two cents, there are move relevant things to be addressed in regards to the SAFE network.
2 Likes
But you said no one would ever be stopped?
EDIT: Spelling
Sorry, that statement was technically incorrect. What i should have said is the percentage of computer owners who will be stopped is so infinitesimally small that it makes no difference.
1 Like
Just as wrong as your first statement. “Makes no difference” until your the guy. Im not making this bigger than it is but those that claim its no big deal are out of touch.
I get your point, but personally I’ll worry about things more likely to mess up my day.
Plus I just like to live on the edge!
3 Likes
I just act tired and bored with slight “let’s just get over with this” undertones, and somehow never have been searched. Though it’s never really acting 
I noticed that asking if the half-eaten sandwich in your backpack counts as “meat products” gets you past pretty quick, too.
A simple question about the legality of SAFE has turned into a 64 replies thread / debate , including some posts describing different ways to “bypass” the problem.
I did not quite expect this, and it gives me new worries about the mass adoption of SAFE, because I doubt the average Joe (even one who wants more privacy) is willing to learn terms like “shell” , to "Create an encrypted virtualbox " and input lines like “/bin/wipe -r /home/” anywhere in his computer.
1 Like
Then simply stop reading the posts after this one because it contains the answer to your concern:
3 Likes
Don’t worry Be happy 
If SAFE won’t get mass adoption, I don’t think that legal issues will be the cause.
Reading this thread, it seems I’m not the only one who thinks that legal issues aren’t a significant problem.
And what is seen as not a big problem, gets less priority.
1 Like
It’s a stupid challenge and wildly ignorant. Why you found it interesting is beyond me. Such nonsense can be easily dismissed…
if MaidSafe’s main selling point is you store someone elses’ encrypted data on your hard drive
That’s twisted back to front. The main selling point is providing privacy and security to all. You provide a fundamentally useful service, you are not liable for what people choose to do with it. The benefits far outway the negatives.
We share the same drinking water as others; etc … people who think in dull two tone like that, should hold their breath for fear that they are sharing the same air as those with more sense.
The questions you should be asking and more concerned with are those which query notions that people should not have privacy; that they should have only proxy security that they cannot rely on; and that they should have no freedom other than that allowed by their masters… we should not be slaves.
Enabling individuals has more merit than enabling the machine. Centralised power and wealth is most corrupting for all the good intentions of the individuals who contribute to the problem.
4 Likes
Is there an argument in this, or is it really just the personal attack it seems to be?
Enabling individuals to ask whatever they want and be concerned with what they choose would most certainly be welcome in a free world, don’t you think?
1 Like
Completely inappropriate response. Stop reading? com on’? That is not the answer. Not even close. You clearly dont understand the OP question. The original question is not about ability to read files its about custody of those files and any potential queries or challenges as to their contents by law enforcement.
The OP should be concerned with the lack of respect some have for the seriousness of this issue. With all the information available it appears the best way to avoid any issues is to remove anything from a device you cannot explain its contents. Readable or otherwise. I believe David Irvine has also suggested this.
I dont agree with the OP that this issue will impede the success of Maidsafe. Its a problem shared across all storage mediums.
1 Like
Not every stupidity needs to be argued… certain ones can reasonably be thrown back to OP for thinking through the abc’s for themselves. While some conservative minds will never understand why others do not do what they would want them to do, and never what they will want for themselves, such fallacies as those do not need to be indulged … and there is always hope that those minds will grow beyond such nonsense… inevitable even.
Naturally so… we need a medium for communicating freely but still that does not require anyone indulges other’s conservative instincts.
The question in the OP has been changed from:
What do you guys think, Can this be a real concern ?
‘this’ points to this in the OP:
if MaidSafe’s main selling point is you store someone elses’ encrypted data on your hard drive but this act alone is probably illegal or certainly will be. I’m not saying it should be but the west is currently running a paranoid tyrannical gov’t system. So just like when i go to the airport i have to answer the following question: Has anyone put anything in your bag without your knowledge? how is it different than the following question: Has anyone put anything on your laptop without your knowledge of the contents of the files? If you say NO and they open your PC and find an encrypted file placed there by MaidSafe Network then you have just lied to a government agent and can face a 20yr sentence with current laws on the books.
to
Can storing someone else’s “fraudulent files”, knowingly or unknowingly, through the Safe Network, be a concern for MaidSafe, legally speaking ?
There’s no lack of respect from me but the question changed completely from going through the airport with ‘SAFE files’ on your laptop to Maidsafe potentially being held accountable for files on the network.
2 Likes
I said inappropriate. The mere effort by you a moderator to shut down a constructive contributor is unacceptable. You have not addressed the real question.
1 Like
You can’t fix stupid.
Sure 
…
Moderation posts are yellow 