3 ms·

Agreed. That's why I believe it might be super handy if every or at least many phones had this in place so that you don't really stand out. At least every pho

Agreed. That's why I believe it might be super handy if every or at least many phones had this in place so that you don't really stand out. At least every phone using an alternate OS. If all the mainstream operating systems had this I would expect an arms race between the OS devs and the forensics device devs. As a side note, this would not necessarily be only used for law enforcement authorities. It could be that an armed phone thief requires you to unlock your phone. Sending a duress message, maybe even camera footage, GPS coordinates could be quite useful in the event you vanish. Teaching your kids to use this feature on their phones could also be very beneficial.

judge2020 5y ago
You might not stand out but it would still be contempt of court. Not turning over evidence with a constitutional defense is easier to defend in court than malicious fake-compliance.
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  Possibly true in court at least, but I think the end user should have the option to make this decision. Maybe give them a disclaimer that says In bold red text .. "Depending on your jurisdiction you may have legal problems using this feature! Research this and consult an attorney before enabling. You have been warned". In the US this would only apply in courts. AFAIK this would not be the case when interacting with the executive branch such as law enforcement but I am no lawyer. If courts want this data, they can issue a subpoena and follow due process. Law enforcement can pound sand all day long if they are trying to circumvent due process. Using this feature with armed phone thieves would not be a legal risk unless you are filming them in their home. Even then I would be happy to accept any legal risk when interacting with outlaws.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    Even if the feature warned users, Apple and Google would not be off the hook. It’s entirely possible a prosecutor will go after them for implementing a feature designed to evade police and destroy evidence. Us programmers tend to thing the law is black and white and a legal disclaimer solves all issues, but it’s not. The law can be (and is) a gray area determined by the courts on an individual basis. Judges don’t look fondly on technicalities for skirting the law. After all, they are humans, too. Not computers.
    - LinuxBender 5y ago
      I would actually prefer that Apple and Google do not implement this. Even if they accept the risk, it would create an arms race between the phone developers and forensics developers assuming they don't put a back door in this feature. I would prefer this only be implemented by the alternate phone OS developers or by someone maintaining an open source add-on. I should also add this is only a legal risk if you are using this against the courts AND select the options to wipe data. AFAIK you can disavow knowledge to cops all day long in most first world countries with little risk. Again, not a lawyer but it seems this is true based on cases I have followed. And this feature would not just be to protect from police. It could be to protect from phone thieves getting sensitive financial information which arguably should not be on the phone. It could also be used to alert people if people and/or their kids are being robbed. Actually the more I think about it, this feature could save the lives of some police officers. Some people may in poor judgement have data that could carry a longer sentence than killing a police officer. I recall a case where a professional thief killed all the guards because the punishment for the information they were stealing was more detrimental legally than homicide, but this is a bit of a rare tangent. I also have to factor in that some locations there is a very thin gray line between law enforcement and outlaws. Maybe pushing the system to follow due process and maybe even prevent cops from planting data on the phone could be useful. That could be a logging feature of the sandbox. What data was added after duress was activated
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Define "due process". My experience is that the courts will define/apply it however they feel like, usually to your detriment.
- thatcat 5y ago
  wouldn't the judge need to have ordered the search for it to be contempt?
nerdponx 5y ago
> It could be that an armed phone thief requires you to unlock your phone. This exact scenario happened to me. They made me do a factory reset right in front of them, before handing the phone over. I didn't have any opportunity to do anything other than what they asked, and I probably would have been killed if I tried. I don't see how I would have been able to make use of such a feature in that scenario or any similar scenario (e.g. getting arrested at a protest). It's a nice idea, but I think its usefulness might be limited to things like airport security lines. Fortunately, they didn't realize that Find My iPhone persists through factory resets (nice!). Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out how to use the web interface, and ended up accidentally wiping my phone, including the Find My iPhone tracing stuff, so I never managed to trace it anywhere.
- Diederich 5y ago
  > I probably would have been killed if I tried Wow...are you comfortable sharing more details? Thanks.
- renaudg 5y ago
  >Fortunately, they didn't realize that Find My iPhone persists through factory resets (nice!). Wouldn't a thief that knows enough to ask you to do a factory reset also know to ask you to disable Find My iPhone ? I mean you're even prompted to do so during the "erase all content & settings" process, right ?
  - nerdponx 5y ago
    > Wouldn't a thief that knows enough to ask you to do a factory reset also know to ask you to disable Find My iPhone ? No idea, I guess not! This was several years ago, I think Find My iPhone was relatively new. > I mean you're even prompted to do so during the "erase all content & settings" process, right ? I don't remember being prompted. They might also not have been that smart. In addition to my phone and cash, they took my debit card (I was able to convince them to let me keep my various other cards like driver's license, train pass, etc.) and asked for my PIN, but I just called the company and canceled the card within the hour. They didn't take any of my credit cards, my (admittedly cheap) headphones, or (fortunately) think to check my backpack with my $1000+ work laptop in it. I figured they were looking for a quick buck, and it was easier/faster/safer to just grab the cash and the phone than to be thorough and risk someone wandering or driving by. I am also very lucky, I know people who've been robbed in that same area and got beaten up pretty badly, even while trying to comply.

judge2020 5y ago

You might not stand out but it would still be contempt of court. Not turning over evidence with a constitutional defense is easier to defend in court than malicious fake-compliance.

LinuxBender 5y ago
Possibly true in court at least, but I think the end user should have the option to make this decision. Maybe give them a disclaimer that says In bold red text .. "Depending on your jurisdiction you may have legal problems using this feature! Research this and consult an attorney before enabling. You have been warned". In the US this would only apply in courts. AFAIK this would not be the case when interacting with the executive branch such as law enforcement but I am no lawyer. If courts want this data, they can issue a subpoena and follow due process. Law enforcement can pound sand all day long if they are trying to circumvent due process. Using this feature with armed phone thieves would not be a legal risk unless you are filming them in their home. Even then I would be happy to accept any legal risk when interacting with outlaws.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  Even if the feature warned users, Apple and Google would not be off the hook. It’s entirely possible a prosecutor will go after them for implementing a feature designed to evade police and destroy evidence. Us programmers tend to thing the law is black and white and a legal disclaimer solves all issues, but it’s not. The law can be (and is) a gray area determined by the courts on an individual basis. Judges don’t look fondly on technicalities for skirting the law. After all, they are humans, too. Not computers.
  - LinuxBender 5y ago
    I would actually prefer that Apple and Google do not implement this. Even if they accept the risk, it would create an arms race between the phone developers and forensics developers assuming they don't put a back door in this feature. I would prefer this only be implemented by the alternate phone OS developers or by someone maintaining an open source add-on. I should also add this is only a legal risk if you are using this against the courts AND select the options to wipe data. AFAIK you can disavow knowledge to cops all day long in most first world countries with little risk. Again, not a lawyer but it seems this is true based on cases I have followed. And this feature would not just be to protect from police. It could be to protect from phone thieves getting sensitive financial information which arguably should not be on the phone. It could also be used to alert people if people and/or their kids are being robbed. Actually the more I think about it, this feature could save the lives of some police officers. Some people may in poor judgement have data that could carry a longer sentence than killing a police officer. I recall a case where a professional thief killed all the guards because the punishment for the information they were stealing was more detrimental legally than homicide, but this is a bit of a rare tangent. I also have to factor in that some locations there is a very thin gray line between law enforcement and outlaws. Maybe pushing the system to follow due process and maybe even prevent cops from planting data on the phone could be useful. That could be a logging feature of the sandbox. What data was added after duress was activated
- giantg2 5y ago
  Define "due process". My experience is that the courts will define/apply it however they feel like, usually to your detriment.
thatcat 5y ago
wouldn't the judge need to have ordered the search for it to be contempt?

nerdponx 5y ago

> It could be that an armed phone thief requires you to unlock your phone. This exact scenario happened to me. They made me do a factory reset right in front of them, before handing the phone over. I didn't have any opportunity to do anything other than what they asked, and I probably would have been killed if I tried. I don't see how I would have been able to make use of such a feature in that scenario or any similar scenario (e.g. getting arrested at a protest). It's a nice idea, but I think its usefulness might be limited to things like airport security lines. Fortunately, they didn't realize that Find My iPhone persists through factory resets (nice!). Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out how to use the web interface, and ended up accidentally wiping my phone, including the Find My iPhone tracing stuff, so I never managed to trace it anywhere.

Diederich 5y ago
> I probably would have been killed if I tried Wow...are you comfortable sharing more details? Thanks.
renaudg 5y ago
>Fortunately, they didn't realize that Find My iPhone persists through factory resets (nice!). Wouldn't a thief that knows enough to ask you to do a factory reset also know to ask you to disable Find My iPhone ? I mean you're even prompted to do so during the "erase all content & settings" process, right ?
- nerdponx 5y ago
  > Wouldn't a thief that knows enough to ask you to do a factory reset also know to ask you to disable Find My iPhone ? No idea, I guess not! This was several years ago, I think Find My iPhone was relatively new. > I mean you're even prompted to do so during the "erase all content & settings" process, right ? I don't remember being prompted. They might also not have been that smart. In addition to my phone and cash, they took my debit card (I was able to convince them to let me keep my various other cards like driver's license, train pass, etc.) and asked for my PIN, but I just called the company and canceled the card within the hour. They didn't take any of my credit cards, my (admittedly cheap) headphones, or (fortunately) think to check my backpack with my $1000+ work laptop in it. I figured they were looking for a quick buck, and it was easier/faster/safer to just grab the cash and the phone than to be thorough and risk someone wandering or driving by. I am also very lucky, I know people who've been robbed in that same area and got beaten up pretty badly, even while trying to comply.