450
What a terrible decision. That's like saying if you have a house key they can search your house.
There’s a reason they keep you focused on the first two amendments. Don’t want you realizing how comfortable they are with unregulated search and seizure.
Honestly idk how the civil forfeiture can possibly be considered constitutional
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
That's why passwords are safer in this situation. Cops can't compel you to reveal it.
Oblig:
I miss when crypto nerd meant cryptography nerd
It still does. People who like cryptocurrency are crypto bros (regardless of gender).
load more comments
(4 replies)
Yeah, unfortunately, this isn't a new thing, just upholding the old standard. I explicitly avoid fingerprint and face recognition features because of this. Your fingerprint and your face are legally considered what you are, so things like 5th amendment right to avoid self incrimination don't apply, but passwords and PINs are legally considered what you know, so you can't be forced to divulge.
The wrinkle in this case is that the thumb print giver was in parole. The conditions of parole stated that failure to divulge phone pass codes on phones could result in arrest and phone seizure "pending further investigation". The parole conditions didn't say anything about forcible thumb print taking.
So the logic here seems to be:
- If he had agreed to unlock the phone then the result would be the same.
- If he refused to unlock the phone, that is a legitimate grounds for arrest. Fingerprinting is a routine part of being arrested, so there's really no harm if it's done on a phone in a patrol car. Either way, the result would end up about the same.
Yeah that's even less than what the standard is. That's just saying "you have to do what's in the conditions of your parole, and we won't accept sneaky technicalities."
But I suppose "appeals court rules that you have to obey the terms of your parole" is far less ragebaity.
The real story here is how terms of parole are often ridiculous and contribute heavily to our high recidivism rate. Not to mention stripping away rights.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
You can use the lockdown mode on Android, but you have to remember to turn it on.
Android: Search settings for “Lockdown” and enable “Show lockdown option”
When needed hold the power button and the lockdown option will appear alongside the standard power menu options.
IOS: Hold the Lock button and either volume button to show the power off screen. Cancel out and FaceID will be disabled until you use your pin to unlock the phone.
You can also spam the power button on IOS. It should pop up the same menu as holding the power button. You can cancel, but it requires a password to get back into the phone.
load more comments
(9 replies)
iPhone users:
-
DO NOT USE FINGERPRINT unless you absolutely have to for, say, disability reasons.
-
if you use facial recognition, don’t. Same as above.
-
If you find yourselves in a situation with the police, tap the lock button 5 times. This forces a passcode to open the phone and they cannot (yet) force you to enter a passcode.
Anytime I am filming a protest or anywhere near police, I just tap the lock button a bunch of times in my pocket and I can rest easy.
Samsung users (not sure if it also applies to other android flavors):
Go to settings>lock screen>secure lock>show lockdown option and turn it on.
Now if you hold the power button for over a second, a menu pops up with an option to turn on lockdown mode. This disables all biometric unlock methods until the next time you unlock it.
load more comments
(4 replies)
You can also just hold power + volume up while it’s locked, once you feel the buzz it won’t accept biometrics until you put in the password.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Luckily GrapheneOS has a duress passowrd feature. Very useful for these situatuons!
load more comments
(8 replies)
OP can you put the country in the title? Like [US] for example
Done!
Wasn't there a court ruling that forcing someone to unlock their phone was unconstitutional? The fourth amendment seems to indicate a warrent at least is required to search someone's papers, in the modern era that should apply to phones, obviously the constitution is meaningless if they want to do whatever but still.
Edit: in Riley v. California (2014) the Supreme Court unanimously decided that warrentless search of a cellphone during an arrest was unconstitutional.
The laws vary from state to state, and I am not a lawyer. But in general, I think it works like this. Things like your fingerprints, face, retina, etc, identify you. In many states, if the cops ask for your identification you are required to give it to them, and they are allowed to force the issue. Things like passwords, access to the interior of your home or vehicle, access to your business files, and things like that are not your identity and normally require a judge to sign a warrant (unless there are "extenuating circumstances").
Personally, I think the forcing you to unlock your phone without a warrant is bullshit, especially since they have the upper hand anyway. And the phone isn't going anywhere and neither are you. In most cases they have plenty of time to get a warrant.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Laughs in Galaxy S8 where the fingerprint scanner only works if all planets are properly aligned which happens only once in 28 years.
load more comments
(1 replies)
This has been the law for a while, it's just that more Circuits are aligning. Don't use biometrics if you don't want LEO to be able to access your phone. A password is covered by 5A in some circuits and in others it's likely sufficient to just refuse or claim faulty memory due to the stress of the situation. Regardless of the location, the contents of the device are covered by 4A and you may succeed in getting a lot of whatever is found thrown out -- classic you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.
Worth noting, with the caveat that how criminals are treated could eventually become how everyone is treated on the right slippery slope:
provisions of his parole required him to surrender any electronic devices and passcodes
load more comments
(4 replies)
The 9th circuit court judges really have no fucking clue about technology do they
And this is why you never, ever, EVER enable biometrics. EVER. Make a damn password or at least a very long PIN and enter that shit every time.
For people who don't want to do that: turn off your phone if there's the likelihood that your phone will be confiscated soon (crossing a state border or getting a perquisition). This will
- Disable biometrics
- Encrypt everything
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I've said it before that I'll say it again: Biometrics are a convenience to allow you or anyone else to unlock your phone quickly. Biometrics are NOT security.
DO NOT use biometrics to secure your phone unless you want anyone who has you and your phone to be able to unlock your phone without your permission.
Biometrics are not secret and should not be used in place of passwords. They are identity like a user name. It's the same problem with orgs trying to use ssn as a security challenge, with all the beaches pretty much everyone's is already public knowledge.
load more comments
(2 replies)
face based and fingerprint based unlocking schemes is a bad idea.
if you dead someone can still unlock your phone with your corpse
You are unable to care at that point though.
PSA FOR IPHONE:
if you press volume up, then volume down, then hold the power button until the power slider comes on, then it will disable biometrics until next unlock
For GrapheneOS (custom android), there is Lockdown button next to power off and restart which does the same thing. I think it may be on other Android phones as well but not sure.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
I wish there was a way to require both biometrics and PIN. They're both insecure on their own, but together they're better. Like instant MFA for your unlock. I would enable that immediately, if it was available.
Edit: then a password / passphrase in case one of the other two stops working (as an emergency unlock).
load more comments
(36 replies)
Do not use thumbprint Do not use facial recognition
No matter how desperate companies want you to.... Apple , looking at you
Just use a passcode. Passwords can't be forced from you by police. Judges are a different thing.
load more comments
(2 replies)
iOS users can press and hold the power and volume up button until the emergency call screen appears, then release. You now have to enter your PIN / Password to unlock again and not use TouchID / FaceID. Good luck trying to get me to tell you the code.
Similarly, on Android there's an option in your lock screen settings along the lines of "Show lockdown option" that adds a lockdown button to the power/restart menu when holding the power button.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Doesn't it boil down to like what you know is safe, what you are can be used?
Like they can't make you give passwords, but biometrics are vulnerable.
load more comments
(4 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
450 points (98.9% liked)
Privacy
4027 readers
2 users here now
A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy
Rules:
- Be civil
- No spam posting
- Keep posts on-topic
- No trolling
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS