3 ms·

I think a fingerprint is easier to get if you’re not willing to cooperate. However, I think if they really, I mean really want your password, they will probably

I think a fingerprint is easier to get if you’re not willing to cooperate. However, I think if they really, I mean really want your password, they will probably find a way to get it out of you. I think it also depends if it’s the local sheriff asking for your password or someone from the FBI while you’re tied up in a bunker somewhere in Nevada.

chiefalchemist 5y ago
Apple should allow for 2 PWs, one the real PW, the other triggers a "self-destruct" mode. Knowing that is possible law enforcement would then hesitate to ask.
- detaro 5y ago
  using such a self-destruct mode would be a certain way getting yourself charged with destroying evidence/contempt of court/... though.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    i was under such duress that i was shaking so badly that i made typos in my 30 character password 10 times. the loss of evidence is not my fault as it is the people putting me under that duress. don't think it'll hold up though
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - kingcharles 5y ago
    This would be difficult to prove. They would have to know for certain the evidence was on there to begin with. I don't see the prosecutor easily meeting their burden of proof on this charge. This is how the statute is worded here in Illinois: "A person obstructs justice when, with intent to prevent the apprehension or obstruct the prosecution or defense of any person, he or she knowingly commits any of the following acts: (1) Destroys, alters, conceals or disguises physical evidence." Ugh. It's a vague law. I don't even know how they would prosecute that for virtual evidence held on a device that they didn't already have a view inside of.
  - chiefalchemist 5y ago
    No 5th Amendment protection? If you spoke the command / "password", would it matter?
- oceanplexian 5y ago
  FaceID can already prevent a device from unlocking if someone is sleeping. In theory devices could detect if they were being unlocked "under duress" by using biometrics to look at facial expressions, heartbeat, etc, and then wipe themselves. I don't know how practical in reality but perhaps it could be a feature you turn on in a sensitive environment.

chiefalchemist 5y ago

Apple should allow for 2 PWs, one the real PW, the other triggers a "self-destruct" mode. Knowing that is possible law enforcement would then hesitate to ask.

detaro 5y ago
using such a self-destruct mode would be a certain way getting yourself charged with destroying evidence/contempt of court/... though.
- dylan604 5y ago
  i was under such duress that i was shaking so badly that i made typos in my 30 character password 10 times. the loss of evidence is not my fault as it is the people putting me under that duress. don't think it'll hold up though
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- kingcharles 5y ago
  This would be difficult to prove. They would have to know for certain the evidence was on there to begin with. I don't see the prosecutor easily meeting their burden of proof on this charge. This is how the statute is worded here in Illinois: "A person obstructs justice when, with intent to prevent the apprehension or obstruct the prosecution or defense of any person, he or she knowingly commits any of the following acts: (1) Destroys, alters, conceals or disguises physical evidence." Ugh. It's a vague law. I don't even know how they would prosecute that for virtual evidence held on a device that they didn't already have a view inside of.
- chiefalchemist 5y ago
  No 5th Amendment protection? If you spoke the command / "password", would it matter?
oceanplexian 5y ago
FaceID can already prevent a device from unlocking if someone is sleeping. In theory devices could detect if they were being unlocked "under duress" by using biometrics to look at facial expressions, heartbeat, etc, and then wipe themselves. I don't know how practical in reality but perhaps it could be a feature you turn on in a sensitive environment.