530

The recent federal raid on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson isn’t merely an attack by the Trump administration on the free press. It’s also a warning to anyone with a smartphone.

Included in the search and seizure warrant for the raid on Natanson’s home is a section titled “Biometric Unlock,” which explicitly authorized law enforcement personnel to obtain Natanson’s phone and both hold the device in front of her face and to forcibly use her fingers to unlock it. In other words, a judge gave the FBI permission to attempt to bypass biometrics: the convenient shortcuts that let you unlock your phone by scanning your fingerprint or face.-

It is not clear if Natanson used biometric authentication on her devices, or if the law enforcement personnel attempted to use her face or fingers to unlock her devices. Natanson and the Washington Post did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The FBI declined to comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

People, if you are taken into custody and are forced to unlock the phone and you wipe the phone instead, you are living in a fantasy world if you think you can't get in trouble for that.

Maybe that's worth it but let's not kid ourselves that there wouldn't be consequences.

Remember plausible deniability is a social concept not a legal one. It might of helped you get out of being grounded but it won't save you from jail time.

[-] monovergent@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 day ago

In matters where the judgement of the courts cannot be trusted and I would be jailed either way, I'd rather have the option to wipe my phone.

[-] upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

Like I said, maybe it worth it to you. Some people commenting like a distress pin is some sort of pancea.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

That's why you need a second account the distress pin opens that looks like it's used for some stuff which leaves the rest encrypted.

[-] mattyroses@lemmy.today 8 points 1 day ago
[-] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not relevant. The distress code on Graphene OS wipes the data on the phone, not encrypt it. Can't give what doesn't exist

[-] mattyroses@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago

What you're trying to hide is information.

You're just shown them that you have information, and it's valuable enough for you to take pains to hide it.

They might not get it all, but they'll use the wrench to try.

[-] discocactus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

It's just risk management. If the only record of incriminating or sensitive (contacts for journalists, gps history etc) is on your phone it's much better to get in trouble for deleting it than whatever else it implies or proves you or someone else did.

[-] upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

That is highly dependant on the country you do it in.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Depending on the case, the legal punishment of wiping ones phone in custody might be less than the legal punishment of not wiping a phone. It could be akin to Chelsea Manning taking 62 days of lockup for contempt charges instead of testifying.

this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
530 points (99.1% liked)

Privacy

45199 readers
284 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS