For criminal organizations, it's common to "decipher" coded language to juries. And it's really not that difficult when drug dealers are talking about "kings" in conversations that have nothing to do with royalty or poker. (a "king" generally means a kilogram of cocaine.)
OK, but I think you missed the point of the question above. The point was whether a court can compel people to explain a secret code, and whether there should be a different standard, if that code involves the computer or not
It's more likely backroom kickbacks (and/or mossad) than invisible unicorn.