• gedaliyah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    197
    ·
    5 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
      46
      ·
      5 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

    • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      they did in fact use the data seized from his phone to find his house, then took his key and searched it

    • yeldarb12@r.nf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      There are finger print locks for doors available commercially too

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      5 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

  • bolexforsoup
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    edit-2
    5 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
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      5 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
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 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
          1
          ·
          5 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
            ·
            5 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.

          • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I don’t see how they can ever enforce that. Also, if they really want they can plug the device in and make you log in I guess?

    • felsiq@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 months ago

      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.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      on android you can get Private Lock which locks your phone and disables biometric unlock, when the phone is shaken hard enough

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      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.

      How does that help if the police are the ones that alert you to their presence? I highly recommend against quickly shoving your hand in your pocket to tap a button 5 times.

      • bolexforsoup
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I do it in anticipation. It’s not like they sneak up on you like a ninja. They are very clearly around.

        Plus it takes like 2 seconds. Unless they got you at gunpoint you’re probably going to have an opportunity to accomplish this. Most people interact with police in the US being pulled over - you’re telling me you can’t lock your phone before they come to your window?

    • Scotty_Trees@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 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!

      • bolexforsoup
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Another dude pointed out you can hold lock + volume up as well

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

      I learned something from my (quite activists) daughters recently: they delete the Signal app each time they cross a border.

      It’s the main coordination and information tool in their circles, and the recommended behavior is just to not have the app when at risk.

      Good luck finding incriminating evidence stifling through zillions of Pouting Selfies and Gossip-Sharing Screenshots of Idiot Boyfriend’ text messages.

  • aa1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

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

  • onion@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    OP can you put the country in the title? Like [US] for example

  • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    5 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.

    • Boozilla@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      5 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
        8
        ·
        5 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.

      • bitwaba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 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
          ·
          5 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

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 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
          3
          ·
          5 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
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            5 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.

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

        There are two related but distinct issues, and I hope to keep them separate otherwise the conversation goes in circles:

        1 - Can police under the circumstances look at the contents of the phone at all? This is to say, if the phone is completely unlocked, can they look through it?

        2 - If the police are allowed to look at the contents, but the phone is locked, in what ways can the police unlock it?

        Subject 1: This is by far the more important question, and the one that seems to get ignored in discussions of phone searches like this. I would argue that under most circumstances there is no probable cause to search a phone- the phone can not contain drugs or weapons or other contraband, so to me this is the larger hurdle for police. Police should have to justify what illegal thing they think is on the phone that gives them probable cause, and I don’t think that pictures of illegal things are the same as the illegal things themselves. Lawyers would have to hash this out, because I do notice the suspect here was on parole so perhaps there is a clause of parole for this or something. But this is the bigger, much bigger issue- can police even look at the contents? There is an argument from the pro-search side that constants of an unlocked phone are in plain view, and so that right there is a big nexus for the issue.

        Subject 2: If we assume yes, only then does subject 2 become an issue. How much can police compel? Well, they can’t compel speech. A passcode would count as protected speech, so they can’t compel that. Biometrics however, from what I have seen of court reasoning, tend to be viewed as something a person has rather than something they know. This would be analogue to a locked container with a combination lock compared to a key. The police can not compel the combo, but if they find they key in your pocket they can take it and use it.


        If you are up in arms about privacy, my view is not to fall into the trap of focusing on 2 and the finer mechanics of where the line for what kinds of ways to lock a phone are, and focus on subject 1. Reduce the circumstances in which searching a phone is acceptable, even if the phone is unlocked to begin with.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 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.

    • Censored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 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.

  • cheddar@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    5 months ago

    Laughs in Galaxy S8 where the fingerprint scanner only works if all planets are properly aligned which happens only once in 28 years.

    • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Dude I have this old Galaxy XCover thing for my work phone and I swear to god I’ve wasted 3x as much time repeating the stupid fingerprint unlock over and over than if I just always used my PIN. It’s such a piece of shit.

      “Cover the entire fingerprint sensor” “The fingerprint doesn’t match” “Try wiping the fingerprint sensor” “Try fingerprint again in 28 seconds”

      Try going ahead and fucking off, Samsung.

  • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

  • the_doktor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    5 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_n_bored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      5 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 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
        ·
        5 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
      5
      ·
      5 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.

  • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 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

    • Boozilla@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      Unfortunately the judge also ruled that it’s no different than forcing someone to give their fingerprints when you book them. If this sets a precedent, it could apply to anyone getting arrested, not just parolees / prior convicts.

    • Noxy@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Wow, that is supremely fucked up. Parole shouldn’t require breaching the privacy of anyone who has conversation history stored on the parolee’s devices.

  • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

  • jake_jake_jake_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 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
      11
      ·
      5 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
          5 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.

      • jake_jake_jake_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 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

    • Censored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 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.

  • LordCrom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

          • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Hey, I’m from the other thread, and I’m using Thunder on mobile… seeing as I ended up blocking MindTraveller to keep my blood pressure at a reasonable level, thus preventing me from seeing that whole comment chain and replying to you in that thread… and … I don’t seem to be able to initiate a dm on Thunder? Maybe because your account is based in another instance?

            Just wanted to reply to you here.

            Thank you. I’m 35, queer autistic man, and I somehow seem to be the most left leaning person I know IRL at nearly all times of my life, and I actually put my… boots where my ideology is, worked at non profits, volunteered, actually do the mutual aid thing.

            But somehow, online, theres always somebody who in their mind is the perfect embodiment of the progressive advocate, the perfect member of society who… fairly obviously is either extremely privileged, or terminally online to the point of delusion, and they will have no problem telling you that actually you’re a pos because they have a whole fun world view that answers every question even though it bears little resemblance to reality, and your reality informed views do not align with this.

            Cest la vie, thats just how things go.

            Thanks again for your kind words, and I guess apologies to the mods, if someone could explain to me how to dm another user on Thunder, I’d appreciate it.

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

              Odd, I can’t either on Sync or Web, but was able to in Voyager(Whether you will receive it or not, remains to be seen). Gay guy, 37, probably queer but the definition changes so much I never know when it is OK to use it and when it is not, but I agree.

              And I am not as hardcore as you are, I wish I could afford it though. Third world living in a capitalistic hellscape can be tough. And today I am dealing with mortality again as my oldest cat is very ill, so I haven’t slept in a while.

              I am very scientific, critical of everything, and try to fight for what I believe in, which is hard, especially when I have 3 cats who depend on me.

              And from what I said earlier, you deserve every word. You are a beacon, my boy.

              • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Thanks, truly.

                (Hey, I’m being so sincere right now =P)

                ((See other reply to your other comment))

                Best wishes to your cats.

        • Two9A@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s law in the UK:

          Section 49 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 gives the police the power to issue a notice which requires the suspect to disclose their PIN or password if necessary. You are not compelled to provide your password to the police in any instance.

          However, section 53 of RIPA makes it a criminal offence not to comply with the terms of a s.49 notice which is punishable by up to two years imprisonment and up to 5 years imprisonment in cases involving national security and child indecency.

          • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            So you have to hand over your password if they claim you wont give over your password cause you are hiding CSM?

            also the guy I am thinking of is American… which I cant find, because there are too many stories about Americans being put in jail/prison for ridiculouslylong amounts of time for not giving over passwords

            • Two9A@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              If the police and/or Crown Prosecution Service claim you’re hiding Material behind a password, you can either hand over the password or get thrown in jail under RIPA §53.

              I don’t know what section of the US Code would apply for the same, but a generic “Obstructing Justice” wouldn’t surprise me.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      No matter how desperate companies want you to… Apple , looking at you

      Are you implying there is some ulterior motive in phone manufacturers including fingerprint scanners? That Apple has them because they secretly want to make it easier for police to conduct phone searches? Because that’s a very bold claim, and “because customers like the convenience” seems to me like a much simpler explanation.

      • LordCrom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        From experience, with facial scan or fingerprint scan available on Apple, 3rd party app require it. E.g. okta MFA login, for those with apple phones, using face scan can be forced. I know you are free to decline and free to quit the company requiring it, but just like any new data set, you soon won’t be able to live without providing it.

        Remember when a social security number was introduced, gov promised it wouldn’t be used as a identification number for any other purpose . Forward 50 years and now you can’t do anything without it.

  • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    5 months ago

    face based and fingerprint based unlocking schemes is a bad idea.

    if you dead someone can still unlock your phone with your corpse