[anonym29]

While this is true, the Fifth Amendment protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves, and there is currently no law compelling key (or password) disclosure in the United States.

Your choice of jurisdiction matters.

[gamblor956]

That's partially true. Self incrimination refers to testimonial acts, and turning over data on a hard drive (or a physical key) is not a testimonial act.

[anonym29]

The idea of a physical key, or even a physical hard drive being in play is a moot point for me, as the server and the storage drive aren't even in my possession.

Even though the laws may facilitate a corrupt judge ordering me to provide a password, or even chaining back-to-back "contempt of court" charges just because I forgot my password, or my Russian provider locked me out, that doesn't make the judge's abuse of authority in that hypothetical scenario legitimate or just.

[tmottabr]

Just because you think the judge is abusing their authority in that hypothetical scenario and that their ruling is not legitimate or just does not mean it will not happen or that you will not end up in jail.

If they want the camera recordings they will subpoena you, if you do not deliver it for whatever reason they they can find you in contempt of court and in that case you can get arrested the same way regardless of what you fell about it.

[gamblor956]

Your choice of non-local provider for the express purpose of preventing physical access to justify evading a potential subpoeana can and will be held against you.

And that has been the law for over a century. Technology isn't some sort of magical wand that changes how the law works.