6 ms·

The issue with Biometrics, atleast for those in the US, is that they are not protected by the 5th amendment. Court cases have reaffirmed this, meaning you can b

The issue with Biometrics, atleast for those in the US, is that they are not protected by the 5th amendment. Court cases have reaffirmed this, meaning you can be forced to provide your Biometrics for law enforcement to gain access to your devices. Some may feel this is acceptable with the thought if your not guilty then you should have nothing to hide, but this is a fallacy as it tramples over our 4th amendment rights. With passwords locked in your head, you cannot be forced to give that information as that is protected by the 5th amendment. Accessing the device or any information protected by a password must then be done with other means or not admissible as longer delays violates due process.

scarface74 7y ago
You’re assuming that law enforcement doesn’t routinely force suspects to give up their PINs and lie and say it was voluntary. On the other hand, it was reported in the UK (?) that law enforcement follows around suspects, wait for them to unlock their phone in public and tackle them before they re lock it.
- datapunk 7y ago
  No one is forced to give up information, you mean they were convinced and ignorant of their rights. Which was given up voluntarily in any case. The tactic you mentioned has been used here in the US aswell. Something similar was done to DPR that brought down The Silk Road.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You really don’t think that police brutality is a thing - ie rubber hose decryption?
    - datapunk 7y ago
      I think your point is moot. Is torture legal? Is any evidence gained through torture admissable? Are any law enforcement allowed to use torture to gain access to information? You should be able to answer those yourself. Legal rights are not trumpt by illegal tactics, no matter what information is recovered.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Is torture legal? No, but it happens all of the time. Is any evidence gained through torture admissable? If the police lie and say the person wasn’t tortured or do you believe that police don’t lie? Are any law enforcement allowed to use torture to gain access to information? Yes and police never lie and district attorneys never illegally withhold evidence from the defense.... You’re making a lot of assumptions that police, judges, and district attorneys play by the rules and that overworked public defenders have the time or the will to be great advocates for defenders.
- stordoff 7y ago
  It was done to Ulbricht: > But at 3:15 p.m., the quiet was broken when, out of nowhere, a young woman in street clothes charged toward Ulbricht yelling, "I'm so sick of you!" and grabbed his laptop. Ulbricht leapt from his seat to grab it back, when the half dozen other readers at nearby tables suddenly lunged for him, pushing him up against a window. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dead-end-on-silk-road-internet-crime-kingpin-ross-ulbrichts-big-fall-122158/ https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dead-end-o... Though the British police are using it as well: > Undercover surveillance officers trailed Yew and waited for him to unlock his phone to make a call - thereby disabling the encryption. One officer then rushed in to seize the phone from Yew's hand https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38183819 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38183819
  - Volundr 7y ago
    What about this cases is "forcing suspects to give up their PINs and lying to say it was voluntary."? Both of these was swiftly executing an arrest warrant before the suspect had an opportunity to lock or destroy their device.... seems reasonable. Definitely no lying to say they handed it over voluntarily.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      You really haven’t heard about the multitude of cases where DA’s and law enforcement were complicit in convicting innocent people? Do you think that a justice system where DA’s actually put a “B” by Black potential jurors to find a reason to keep them off the jury (the case went to the Supreme Court), or the case where an eye witness didn’t say anything about facial tattoos, the police wanted to convict someone, so they used Photoshop to remove tattoos from the person they wanted to convict so they would “fit the description” would be above forcing a suspect to unlock their phone? If the government will condone torture to get information out of people because of the “War on Terror”, why wouldn’t they do the same for the “War on Drugs”?
henryfjordan 7y ago
Android for a while has a feature called "lockdown" where you can force a password entry instead of a fingerprint for the next unlock. Takes a little forethought but it's easy enough to remember when going through customs or being pulled over.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  Apple devices require non-biometric auth after boot. Turning my phone off in those situations has worked for me.
  - mav3rick 7y ago
    It's the same with Android.
- mehrdada 7y ago
  Simply squeezing a modern iPhone pressing both side and volume buttons at the same time has this effect.

scarface74 7y ago

You’re assuming that law enforcement doesn’t routinely force suspects to give up their PINs and lie and say it was voluntary. On the other hand, it was reported in the UK (?) that law enforcement follows around suspects, wait for them to unlock their phone in public and tackle them before they re lock it.

datapunk 7y ago
No one is forced to give up information, you mean they were convinced and ignorant of their rights. Which was given up voluntarily in any case. The tactic you mentioned has been used here in the US aswell. Something similar was done to DPR that brought down The Silk Road.
- scarface74 7y ago
  You really don’t think that police brutality is a thing - ie rubber hose decryption?
  - datapunk 7y ago
    I think your point is moot. Is torture legal? Is any evidence gained through torture admissable? Are any law enforcement allowed to use torture to gain access to information? You should be able to answer those yourself. Legal rights are not trumpt by illegal tactics, no matter what information is recovered.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      Is torture legal? No, but it happens all of the time. Is any evidence gained through torture admissable? If the police lie and say the person wasn’t tortured or do you believe that police don’t lie? Are any law enforcement allowed to use torture to gain access to information? Yes and police never lie and district attorneys never illegally withhold evidence from the defense.... You’re making a lot of assumptions that police, judges, and district attorneys play by the rules and that overworked public defenders have the time or the will to be great advocates for defenders.
stordoff 7y ago
It was done to Ulbricht: > But at 3:15 p.m., the quiet was broken when, out of nowhere, a young woman in street clothes charged toward Ulbricht yelling, "I'm so sick of you!" and grabbed his laptop. Ulbricht leapt from his seat to grab it back, when the half dozen other readers at nearby tables suddenly lunged for him, pushing him up against a window. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dead-end-on-silk-road-internet-crime-kingpin-ross-ulbrichts-big-fall-122158/ https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dead-end-o... Though the British police are using it as well: > Undercover surveillance officers trailed Yew and waited for him to unlock his phone to make a call - thereby disabling the encryption. One officer then rushed in to seize the phone from Yew's hand https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38183819 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38183819
- Volundr 7y ago
  What about this cases is "forcing suspects to give up their PINs and lying to say it was voluntary."? Both of these was swiftly executing an arrest warrant before the suspect had an opportunity to lock or destroy their device.... seems reasonable. Definitely no lying to say they handed it over voluntarily.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You really haven’t heard about the multitude of cases where DA’s and law enforcement were complicit in convicting innocent people? Do you think that a justice system where DA’s actually put a “B” by Black potential jurors to find a reason to keep them off the jury (the case went to the Supreme Court), or the case where an eye witness didn’t say anything about facial tattoos, the police wanted to convict someone, so they used Photoshop to remove tattoos from the person they wanted to convict so they would “fit the description” would be above forcing a suspect to unlock their phone? If the government will condone torture to get information out of people because of the “War on Terror”, why wouldn’t they do the same for the “War on Drugs”?

henryfjordan 7y ago

Android for a while has a feature called "lockdown" where you can force a password entry instead of a fingerprint for the next unlock. Takes a little forethought but it's easy enough to remember when going through customs or being pulled over.

AmericanChopper 7y ago
Apple devices require non-biometric auth after boot. Turning my phone off in those situations has worked for me.
- mav3rick 7y ago
  It's the same with Android.
mehrdada 7y ago
Simply squeezing a modern iPhone pressing both side and volume buttons at the same time has this effect.