• tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    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.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The appeals courts are always willing to test SCOTUS decisions. Now it’s up to SCOTUS to defend it or not. It was a unanimous decision, specifically based on data privacy rights. So there’s actually hope for it.

    • Boozilla@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is why everyone should go into their phone settings and enable the lockdown mode option if it’s avaialbe. When I get pulled over I hold the power button and choose lockdown mode and then the only thing that will unlock the phone is my password. But my camera still works.

        If your phone doesn’t have the option, just restart your phone. There’s a reason phones require the password and not biometrics on startup.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        My house key identifies me almost as well as my license. Seems like if they can use my thumb to unlock and enter my phone they could use my house key to unlock and enter my house.

        • Boozilla@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I guess the distinction might be: your fingerprints are physical attributes of your physical person. Your house & house key are objects / property owned by you.

          • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            So if you have a fingerprint smart lock cops don’t need a warent to enter your house?

            A phone is also property owned by you. Or by the company you work for, so it’s not even yours.

      • bitwaba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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

        This is exactly it. If I get arrested and they confiscate my house keys as part of entering jail, they don’t have automatic implicit permission to search my house.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          And I don’t understand how this is not a better analogy for phones. Why doesn’t the contents of my phone have the same legal protection as the contents of my house? You may confiscate my key but I do not permit. If you have good reason and sufficient reason, do the damn paperwork and get a judge to sign off

    • Censored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is really about how to ensure they can’t unlock your phone even if they have a warrant. They can’t physically force you to give them the right code. SO they have to buy expensive software to clone the phone and try various passwords on the clones.

  • the_doktor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • Tired and bored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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

      1. Disable biometrics
      2. Encrypt everything
      • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        On Android, entering lockdown mode does the same thing. You can do it by pressing volume-up and power at the same time, then tapping Lockdown.

      • Censored@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        And this only makes it more expensive and time consuming to unlock. So if you’re small fry, they won’t waste the resources. But if you are a “person of interest” don’t be dumb, bring a burner phone.

    • Boozilla@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Completely agree. There are a surprising number of folks who should know better who will swear up and down how safe they are. If they like the convenience and the “cool factor” of using them…that’s fine, whatever, none of my business. Just don’t try to gaslight me that they are safe.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not always an option. Sometimes reaching for your phone to turn it off will get you killed. Just don’t use biometrics.

  • McNasty@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

      • Unreliable@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Both iOS and Android have Lockdown options, so that isn’t even completely necessary, granted it will also work.

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          On iOS hold vol up (or down) and power at the same time. It starts SOS but you can cancel. At this point Face ID is disabled and you must enter your pin to reenable it.

          So yeah. As soon as you see lights, hit that cop button.

          Just make sure you have all your docs on paper so you don’t have to open your phone.

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    What a terrible decision. That’s like saying if you have a house key they can search your house.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      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

  • jake_jake_jake_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    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

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yes, and it may be a good idea to have it just in case. But the courts in the US so far mostly ruled that police forcing you to give biometrics to unlock is fine, as it is the same as fingerprinting you when you are arrested. But forcing you to give pin/password is the same as testifying against yourself, which is against the 5th amendment. So they usually can’t make you to give them a pin/password. At least in theory. Still better to have it in practice.

    • Censored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You won’t have the time or ability to do this when the police are involved. DON’T USE IT. It’s not secure.

      • jake_jake_jake_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        99% of the time im not in a situation where i am being confronted by cops, but crossing a border or a traffic stop it is nice to know

  • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    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.

    • odium@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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.

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You can also turn the phone off.

        Edit: and I also have this on my Pixel so this may apply to all versions of android

        • ReallyZen@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Is it a rumor or is there a legal requirement that you must have some battery juuce left (in your laptop iirc) in order to cross US or UK borders? I remember this as an answer to “sorry, can’t fire up my device I’m out of battery”.

          • wildman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’ve seen it happen when flying back to the US through Germany. There was random additional searches at the gate for select passengers. The guy next to me could not get his laptop to turn on as it was out of juice. He was told either he finds / buys a charger or the laptop is not flying with him on the plane.

    • Scotty_Trees@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Holy crap this is a great tip I did not know! I haven’t had a run in with the police in like a decade, but better safe than sorry. Hopefully I never need to use it, but I just tried it on my iphone and works like a charm, so thanks mate!

  • parpol@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Truecrypt had a false volume for this very purpose.

    You have one password to unlock your drive, and one password to fake unlock your drive and instead unlock a volume that looks like your drive, where you store stuff that looks important but isn’t your real secret.

    • roguetrick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      By physical here, they mean using your biometrics by force. They’re still not allowed to beat you with a rubber hose.

      A court, however, can force you to give up a password or hold you in contempt (which is essentially the rubber hose option). Having false unlocks defeats that

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        A court, however, can force you to give up a password or hold you in contempt (which is essentially the rubber hose option)

        That remains to be seen; I don’t think that there’s ever been a definitive ruling on this in the US. One real problem is that they would have to be able to prove that you knew the password, and that can be a real problem. I have an old Tails drive; it’s been years since I used it, and I have no idea what the password is anymore. Shit, I sometimes have a brain fart and can’t remember the passphrase for my password manager, and I use that a lot.

    • waitmarks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I wonder though, if you had that set up and the cops ask you for the code to unlock and you told them the code to wipe and they end up wiping the phone. Would they be able to charge you with evidence tampering?

      • Zomg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        “Sorry, my distress pin is 1 digit off of my unlock pin, you probably fat fingered it by mistake. I guess we’ll never know. You really need to be more careful.”

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’d expect so. You have the right to remain silent. You do not have the right to destroy evidence. How is wiping your phone any different from running around your house flushing things?

        • waitmarks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because they would be the ones actually entering it, you would just say some numbers out loud.

          But probably the smarter thing to do would be to leave the wipe code on a sticky note inside the phone case and hope they try it.

  • randompasta@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s why passwords are safer in this situation. Cops can’t compel you to reveal it.

            • roguetrick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I don’t really know how you misunderstood his post in order to correct you, but I’ll try.

              He’s saying crypto nerds like cryptography and crypto bros are cryptocurrency shills.

              • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Ah, I see. The confusion happened because crypto nerd absolutely does not mean that to the casual public anymore, as bemoaned in the parent comment, and I didn’t realize he was insisting there is still a distinction.

                I really don’t have a leg to stand on with that topic because I always put “libertarian” in scare quotes.

                The thing is, however, that a lot of the crypto nerds are also crypto bros. Or at least, they’re who the crypto bros were trying to be, the guys who were mining Bitcoin when it was worth $0.13, but those two people sound exactly alike on the Internet on their shared interest because they’re both trying to sell you the coins.

    • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

      • mkwt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.
        • lengau@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            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.

      • Scratch@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

        • irish_link@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not sure about Android but IOS you can actually use FaceID for all the things you want like password managers, log into PayPal, and other biometric features but have it disabled to unlock the phone. It’s what I do, you don’t need to spam anything. Just use a pin to unlock.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’ve never understood people who are happy to give their biometrics to fucking PayPal and every other random company. Just use a password for everything.

            • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              You don’t “give” your *biometrics to any of them. Your biometric data is used to encrypt and store each services password hash or auth token on your device.

              *At least when it comes to login authentication. Nothing stopping them from acquiring your biometric data from a hundred data brokers.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Bending over backwards to find logic that lets cops ignore the Constitution.

      If it’s a search violation without biometrics then it’s a search violation with biometrics. Next up they’re going to rule that no matter how much you get recorded telling them you don’t consent to a search, a search is legal as long as they can smash their way into your car.

  • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    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

  • aa1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Luckily GrapheneOS has a duress passowrd feature. Very useful for these situatuons!

  • Censored@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    This isn’t new. This can also be compelled by the courts. If you want your phone secure, don’t have one. If you want it to be expensive to open, use a long passcode, do NOT use fingerprint or face unlock.