5 ms·

The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. The 'work profile' feature use

The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. The 'work profile' feature uses app-sandbox which in effects means every app runs as a Linux type isolated UID (not to differnt to a container), there is no breach around that unless some zero day attack comes to light, which would bw patched way before acme corps IT department picks it up. They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it.

icelancer 6y ago
>> They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. That's not how a subpoena works if it's on the same physical device. Good luck finding a judge who understands the concept of a "software wall."
- izacus 6y ago
  So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? That's a tall order. Also, the title says that GOOGLE spied on someone - which is not a deposition, is it?
  - bee_rider 6y ago
    I'm not sure how these subpoenas usually are worded specifically, but it doesn't seem like that contrived of a situation. Like, if you aren't the suspect and are ordered to hand over all devices used to communicate to <suspicious co-worker X>, if you have a separate device you just hand the thing over. If you hand over a personal phone, they are presumably going to bump into your walled off section and have some questions. Plus, you don't have a phone, while they are working on the thing, which seems like a pain. This is assuming you aren't in a "hand over all electronic devices" kind of situation.
  - icelancer 6y ago
    >> So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? Yes. Source: Been subpoenaed three times and my attorneys have had restrictions placed on what can/cannot be searched... like I am assuming most competent attorneys can provide. The party has to have reasonable indication that relevant data is on personal devices so the opposing counsel doesn't go goldfishing through a bunch of stuff to turn up potentially unrelated dirt in discovery.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
colejohnson66 6y ago
US centric, but courtrooms don’t have time to hear about the technicalities that show something isn’t possible. They only care that they think it’s possible. Judges aren’t programmers and the law isn’t black and white like code. Also, you can’t just not respond to a deposition or refuse to hand over your phone as evidence in a crime. That’s obstruction of justice and possibly contempt of court. Basically, you can sit there for hours on end explaining that it’s impossible to break the “wall”, but that’s time and time in money in the court system (literally), or you can just fork over the phone because it’s not your personal one.
- izacus 6y ago
  What does that have to do with accusation that Google read the messages? From the topic?
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    This far into the thread, it changed to justifying two phones for reasons of possible deposition. I was explaining why it’s a good idea to do that.
    - lern_too_spel 6y ago
      That doesn't make sense. They can request both of your phones just as easily as they can request access to your personal profile on an Android phone.
      - colejohnson66 6y ago
        The idea is based on the idea (heh) that warrants must be tailored to the crime. I can’t get a warrant for your dining room then go upstairs into your bedroom to explore. Now, if a cop saw, say, drug paraphernalia in the kitchen while looking for something else, that’s fine, but they can’t go on random searches (also why they can’t search your car for no reason). That idea extended to civil procedure and phones is that the discovery process for a civil case would be for things related to the lawsuit of which your personal phone might not be. They could certainly request it, but a good lawyer would argue that your personal phone has no connection to the work phone (of which the lawsuit is about) as evidenced by the fact that you have two phones (you intend to separate the two matters). Separate profiles on the same computer (phone) would be harder to argue. It’s not a clear cut matter and would certainly depend on how the judge is feeling, but if there’s a possibility of keeping your personal and work life separate, why not do so? Don’t put all your eggs (data) in one basket (phone) and the like.
BeetleB 6y ago
> The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. Which is likely legally allowed for a deposition. > They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. Telling the courts/lawyers to piss off is not a viable option. That's not how depositions work. You might be able to get a lawyer to file legal motions with expert testimony attached pointing out they shouldn't need access to the whole phone for the reasons you said, but 99% of people will not bother getting a lawyer for something like this.
- suifbwish 6y ago
  Or you could just get really drunk and lose your phone. Happens all the time. The phone company will verify you called for a replacement and the bar will verify you got trashed.
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    IANAL but this strikes me as bad advice.
  - outworlder 6y ago
    IANAL, but isn't that obstruction of justice and/or contempt of court?
    - shkkmo 6y ago
      Yes, probably. That would presumably be why this suggestion includes details that would make proving your intent difficult.
- dylan604 6y ago
  Is that how depositions work though? Being deposed means being asked questions in a very official manner by opposing counsel. During discovery, they can issue a subpoena/warrant which gives them permission to take your possessions.
- 6y ago

icelancer 6y ago

>> They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. That's not how a subpoena works if it's on the same physical device. Good luck finding a judge who understands the concept of a "software wall."

izacus 6y ago
So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? That's a tall order. Also, the title says that GOOGLE spied on someone - which is not a deposition, is it?
- bee_rider 6y ago
  I'm not sure how these subpoenas usually are worded specifically, but it doesn't seem like that contrived of a situation. Like, if you aren't the suspect and are ordered to hand over all devices used to communicate to <suspicious co-worker X>, if you have a separate device you just hand the thing over. If you hand over a personal phone, they are presumably going to bump into your walled off section and have some questions. Plus, you don't have a phone, while they are working on the thing, which seems like a pain. This is assuming you aren't in a "hand over all electronic devices" kind of situation.
- icelancer 6y ago
  >> So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? Yes. Source: Been subpoenaed three times and my attorneys have had restrictions placed on what can/cannot be searched... like I am assuming most competent attorneys can provide. The party has to have reasonable indication that relevant data is on personal devices so the opposing counsel doesn't go goldfishing through a bunch of stuff to turn up potentially unrelated dirt in discovery.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

colejohnson66 6y ago

US centric, but courtrooms don’t have time to hear about the technicalities that show something isn’t possible. They only care that they think it’s possible. Judges aren’t programmers and the law isn’t black and white like code. Also, you can’t just not respond to a deposition or refuse to hand over your phone as evidence in a crime. That’s obstruction of justice and possibly contempt of court. Basically, you can sit there for hours on end explaining that it’s impossible to break the “wall”, but that’s time and time in money in the court system (literally), or you can just fork over the phone because it’s not your personal one.

izacus 6y ago
What does that have to do with accusation that Google read the messages? From the topic?
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  This far into the thread, it changed to justifying two phones for reasons of possible deposition. I was explaining why it’s a good idea to do that.
  - lern_too_spel 6y ago
    That doesn't make sense. They can request both of your phones just as easily as they can request access to your personal profile on an Android phone.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      The idea is based on the idea (heh) that warrants must be tailored to the crime. I can’t get a warrant for your dining room then go upstairs into your bedroom to explore. Now, if a cop saw, say, drug paraphernalia in the kitchen while looking for something else, that’s fine, but they can’t go on random searches (also why they can’t search your car for no reason). That idea extended to civil procedure and phones is that the discovery process for a civil case would be for things related to the lawsuit of which your personal phone might not be. They could certainly request it, but a good lawyer would argue that your personal phone has no connection to the work phone (of which the lawsuit is about) as evidenced by the fact that you have two phones (you intend to separate the two matters). Separate profiles on the same computer (phone) would be harder to argue. It’s not a clear cut matter and would certainly depend on how the judge is feeling, but if there’s a possibility of keeping your personal and work life separate, why not do so? Don’t put all your eggs (data) in one basket (phone) and the like.

BeetleB 6y ago

> The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. Which is likely legally allowed for a deposition. > They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. Telling the courts/lawyers to piss off is not a viable option. That's not how depositions work. You might be able to get a lawyer to file legal motions with expert testimony attached pointing out they shouldn't need access to the whole phone for the reasons you said, but 99% of people will not bother getting a lawyer for something like this.

suifbwish 6y ago
Or you could just get really drunk and lose your phone. Happens all the time. The phone company will verify you called for a replacement and the bar will verify you got trashed.
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  IANAL but this strikes me as bad advice.
- outworlder 6y ago
  IANAL, but isn't that obstruction of justice and/or contempt of court?
  - shkkmo 6y ago
    Yes, probably. That would presumably be why this suggestion includes details that would make proving your intent difficult.
dylan604 6y ago
Is that how depositions work though? Being deposed means being asked questions in a very official manner by opposing counsel. During discovery, they can issue a subpoena/warrant which gives them permission to take your possessions.
6y ago