Comment Without mind wipes... (Score 1) 450
it's pretty much impossible. While it's great that reporters want to protect their sources, ultimately, those sources are almost never revealed by means of technological know-how. They're either revealed because someone decides to talk, or they never come to light and the reporter ends up going to jail for contempt of court.
For example, a local reporter in our area refused to give up the name of his source for confidential videotapes leaked from FBI files (in regard to the trial of then-mayor of Providence, "Buddy" Cianci). The source was ultimately revealed because people started blabbing, not because "Big Brother" ransacked the reporter's hard drive.
While in principle, I think encrypting such data may be a good idea, to keep it away from casual hackers and leaks of that nature, I doubt that cryptography or such things will keep the info out of the hand of law enforcement or other government agencies. They'll fall back on their usual technique of applying pressure to the person, not the technology, and that person either will or will not cave in.
On a bit of a tangent, I don't think there's any real way to keep someone involved in a report from being in the know as to who the source is - anonymous submission sources and the such are not very useful, because then the reporter has no way to judge the credibility of the information.
For example, a local reporter in our area refused to give up the name of his source for confidential videotapes leaked from FBI files (in regard to the trial of then-mayor of Providence, "Buddy" Cianci). The source was ultimately revealed because people started blabbing, not because "Big Brother" ransacked the reporter's hard drive.
While in principle, I think encrypting such data may be a good idea, to keep it away from casual hackers and leaks of that nature, I doubt that cryptography or such things will keep the info out of the hand of law enforcement or other government agencies. They'll fall back on their usual technique of applying pressure to the person, not the technology, and that person either will or will not cave in.
On a bit of a tangent, I don't think there's any real way to keep someone involved in a report from being in the know as to who the source is - anonymous submission sources and the such are not very useful, because then the reporter has no way to judge the credibility of the information.
