7 ms·
The decoy passcode feature should boot into a separate partition that looks like a normal phone setup, and during that time quietly erase the user's actual data
by gblargg 2mo ago
The decoy passcode feature should boot into a separate partition that looks like a normal phone setup, and during that time quietly erase the user's actual data. They would never have known if it worked like this.
- az226 2mo agoProbably, but it will be more valuable for society for him to be tried and found not guilty, setting a legal precedent.
- carterschonwald 2mo ago… that dude probably would have preferred not having that in their life
- 00dazzle 2mo agoNot necessarily? He’s an activist. Getting arrested on purpose to prove a point is a classical activism move
- carterschonwald 2mo agoperhaps, but what public activity isn't activism? eg, i have very interesting empirical evidence that recent Anthropic models are specifically trained to refuse to critique the whitehouse cabinet and elected officials, and that this is in fact an artifact of post training rather than prompts. (its very interesting when you get opus 5 to do the correct ethical evaluation and then its like "i'm slipping back to false balance.... its in my weights....." metaphorically speaking) likewise, i think the current white house should go die in a fire. is that activism? someone can be an activist and not be equipped for unplanned legal escalations. also waiting for the courts to fix things isnt activism if you want to protect people at all the next 2 years at current trajectories :( fixing shit is activism, letting others take the flack, not activism.
- lesuorac 2mo ago> perhaps, but what public activity isn't activism? Buying eggs at the grocery store. You might be too familiar with "activism" as a perjurative but it needn't be one. Gaining visibility to your case by the media reporting on an arrest is sometimes seen as a plus (ex. Rosa Parks). I'm not personally much of that mindset because the media didn't de-segregate the buses. It was black people literally just never taking them until it de-segregated that did.
- taneq 2mo agoPeople pay extra for free range eggs to discourage battery farming, I’d say that counts?
- rjbwork 2mo agoit's only activism when it comes from the woke region of cascadia, otherwise it's just sparkling disgruntlement
- thedrexster 2mo ago>> woke region of cascadia i lol'd, but is there an unwoke region of cascadia?
- forestrywat 2mo agoOh there are many, many parts. By land area, probably most. But not by population.
- idiotsecant 2mo agoYou don't think product selection is a form of activism?
- wahern 2mo agoIt's not really comparable. When activists voluntarily face, and especially when they are in fact, subject to substantial hardship and punishment is when you start changing hearts and minds. Otherwise it's either ignored or generates contempt. Does it suck that that's what it takes to get people to seriously engage with an issue? Sure. But if that weren't the case the issues that need addressing probably wouldn't arise in the first place. People need the consequences to be presented in clear, stark, human terms, to cut through the caucauphony of rhetoric.
- jzemeocala 2mo ago[flagged]
- deepsun 2mo agoRosa Parks has entered the bus
- NamlchakKhandro 2mo ago[flagged]
- warkdarrior 2mo ago[flagged]
- tclancy 2mo ago[flagged]
- tclancy 2mo ago[flagged]
- TechDebtDevin 2mo ago[dead]
- bluefirebrand 2mo agoAssuming he is found (edit: not) guilty, which is not guaranteed at all
- le-mark 2mo agoTrumps DOJ has destroyed credibility with federal judges all ove the country. They’ve had more than one case come back not guilty so far (subway sandwich guy). I’m optimistic they fail to get a guilty verdict here too.
- bluefirebrand 2mo agoThat's positive. I don't live in the USA and I sort of actively avoid news from there. It's good to hear that the federal courts aren't necessarily on Trump's side
- Loughla 2mo agoLike most things in the States, it depends VERY heavily on location. Some judges have plainly bent the knee. Some have gone the opposite. Some actually follow the intent of the law. Some follow it to the letter. Like everywhere else.
- mmcwilliams 2mo agoSandwich guy was acquitted by a jury, not a judge.
- m463 2mo agoIsn't a jury a check against the power of the court? (preventing those expedient "hanging judges")
- mmcwilliams 2mo agoI suppose you could word it that way but the statement given, that Trump's influence is failing with federal judges, isn't demonstrated by a jury refusing to convict someone. That is shown by judges throwing out cases; which has been happening.
- catlover76 2mo ago[dead]
- shimman 2mo agoThat's not going to stop authoritarians from harassing. Want an example of how this played out? United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) was the SCOTUS case that declared if you were born in the US you were a citizen. You think Mr. Ark was okay from harassment after this case was ruled in his favor? Less than 3 years later he would be held in Texas while local authorities tried to deport him under the Chinese Exclusion Act ignoring his previous ruling (that was national news, and they'd be fully aware of). Then after winning his freedom, that he was already granted, he was arrested again in SF where they tried to deport him as well. Then after getting released, for something that he has already proven twice now, he went back to China and never returned to the US. Institutions do not stop authoritarians.
- greesil 2mo agoThey do slow them down a bit
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- expedition32 2mo agoYes I totally agree with all this. The government can and will harass whomever they want. For a hundred years whenever an uppity black man or Northern activist crossed the Mason-Dixie line a KKK sherrif was waiting for them. You don't actually have to jail people- you just have to make their life miserable. At that point your adversary will either shut up or emigrate. Anyone who speaks out against Trump or the GOP is going to be targeted.
- jmyeet 2mo agoExcept that's not going to happen because evidence spoliation (legal term) is a crime. And that's what he did. You can say it shouldn't be but it is. This is slam dunk and it happens all the time. It's the same crime as destroying evidence that's been subpoenaed or that it has a preservation hold on it. And the court gets to assume that whatever was on that phone hurts your case, regardless of whether or not it did. It would've been better if he'd crossed the border with a phone already factory reset and just restore it after entry.
- stouset 2mo agoIndependent of the merits of this case, is there legally a distinction between deleting a secret key that decrypts an encrypted blob (maybe not spoilage?) vs writing over the blob itself (spoilage?). I could see arguments for both, either, or neither but I imagine both are considered spoilage.
- jmyeet 2mo agoThis is the problem I run into with technical people discussing the law all the time and I mean this constructively: stop trying to figure out technical workarounds or look for technical compliance. So much of the law comes down to subjective and/or holistic tests of the facts. As soon as a lawful search is requested, situation has changed. The only question then is if you comply or not. If you remove the ability for that search to take place then how that happened is irrelevant. Destroying a secret key is no different to zeroing a blob of data. Actually the first might be worse. If the key is somehow recoverable (eg you have a copy on a cloud drive) then you can have ongoing penalties by refusing to comply.kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk The only thing that matters is the lawful request. Whatever you do up to that point is treated differently compared to what you do after. You might say: what if I add a deadman's switch where I have to type in a code every 72 hours to stop it wiping itself? Your thought process might be that this is passive. It doesn't matter. As soon as the request is made and you refuse to hit that switch knowing the phone will wipe, legally it's no different. You have destroyed potential evidence when faced with a lawful search. This is what I mean when I say stop looking for loopholes or technical compliance. It does not matter.
- gslepak 2mo agoIt turns out there already is a legal precedent for this. It's called the 4th Amendment: > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
- cute_boi 2mo agoI assumed all these amendment don't apply at border.
- Retric 2mo agoThere’s nothing in the constitution that makes that separation, only people deciding the constitution isn’t actually important “The border” has similarly been extended to cover the majority of the US population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception#/map/0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception#/map/0 Yes, according the the US government warrantless border searches apply in West Virginia. (Map from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception)
- computably 2mo agoIt's based on the interpretation of "unreasonable" and while the current rules may be far from perfect I don't think interpreting routine border searches as categorically "unreasonable" is better.
- wilg 2mo agoWho is proposing interpreting routine border searches as categorically "unreasonable"?
- Retric 2mo ago“Reasonable” and the current definition of what the government considers reasonable are entirely separate things. The entire state of Florida is currently defined as on the US border, that’s effectively a meaningless definition. Further, in what way is the content of someone’s cellphone relevant at a border specifically? Inspecting luggage for cocaine at an entry point makes sense, but physical borders mean little in the face of the internet. You might as well just erase the phone before crossing the border.
- sandworm101 2mo agoNot guilty sets no legal precedent. For that, he needs to be found giulty at trial (no plea bargains) appeal that conviction, and then have an appelate court declare that a mistake was made. I would not wish such a process on anyone.
- guax 2mo agoA precedent is set every time an issue is judged for the first time. If you have any prior case of someone being found guilty or not for this exact case, that would be the precedent. If there is none, then this will set it, including appeal results.
- sandworm101 2mo agoThose are interesting precedents, not the binding ones that count and other courts must follow.
- talon8635 2mo agoDollars to donuts the guys walks, as he should
- Cider9986 2mo agoNot physically possible[1] to be deniable and a bad[2] idea. [1] https://veracrypt.io/en/Wear-Leveling.html https://veracrypt.io/en/Wear-Leveling.html https://veracrypt.io/en/Trim%20Operation.html https://veracrypt.io/en/Trim%20Operation.html [2] https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2082153517234676150#m https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2082153517234676150#m
- krautsauer 2mo agoQuestion on a detail: It's not necessary to have deniability on the fact that you did wipe your device, just on the fact that you did it after you entered the border? Or said differently, if he'd wiped the device before entering the border, it'd be all fine? (That of course only takes down the "physically impossible" part.)
- whaleofatw2022 2mo agoI do believe that yes, if it was wiped before entering, there would be no charges (unless there was a shadow docket open... that gets murky)
- Jolter 2mo agoHence why travelers should simply not cross the border carrying sensitive data, ever. The Internet can take that data across the border for you.
- Borealid 2mo agoI don't understand how wear leveling makes deniability impossible. You just have to overwrite sectors in the false partition at the same rate as ones in the true partition. Since both the true and false partitions are encrypted, their contents are mathematically indistinguishable from randomness when viewed without the decryption key. I also wish that GrapheneOS link didn't say a duress PIN forces the attacker to think twice about entering a PIN, knowing it could wipe the device. It doesn't do that for anyone aware of its existence, since of course the attacker can prevent the secure element from sending a delete command to the flash chip. Obviously if you know the device could attempt to delete itself you would break that feature before sending the code to the secure element...
- stopIiiiit 2mo ago[flagged]
- Loughla 2mo agoWhile I agree with your sentiment, I have to imagine that the decision makers are still older and more out of touch?
- stopIiiiit 2mo agoDecision makers are never going to be responsible for such low level clerical work as reading every tech company product release.
- doh 2mo ago100% I have built similar behavior in my [0] encrypted storage app for iOS. User creates a "duress vault" which is an ordinary vault that user can store any data they want (usually something very inconspicuous). If this vault is opened, it will wipe out all the other vaults silently without actually showing any sign of doing so and still preserving the duress vault's data. Even if snapshot of files is made, the index and keys are gone and can't be recovered. [0] https://vaultaire.app/features/duress-mode/ https://vaultaire.app/features/duress-mode/
- Loughla 2mo agoWhat do you do that you need something like that?
- doh 2mo agoMe personally? Nothing. I added it after users asked me to solve their problem of being strip searched like this. I know some people keep crypto wallet keys in the vaults. Someone else wrote me that they carry sensitive documents they don’t want to be exposed.
- inigyou 2mo agoWhy does Apple allow this app to exist, when it banned Iceblock?
- doh 2mo agoI am no Apple, but this is not a vigilante app. All it does is to encrypt user’s own files on their own devices. There are no servers, no backend, no snooping. It uses apple’s services (icloud) for backup and user allows it, error tracking to hosted posthog.
- markus_zhang 2mo agoIs there a way to implement this on my Android phone?
- karlgkk 2mo agoThat seems overcomplicated and opening yourself up to risk IMO the correct solution is to erase your phone before crossing the border, and then restore it after you’ve crossed
- cortesoft 2mo agoWhat’s to stop them from seeing an empty phone, and then accuse you of deleting it when they asked to see it?
- bentley 2mo agoLack of evidence.
- anywhichway 2mo agoThat isn't a crime. It's not a crime to travel across the border with a factory reset phone. That is a fine thing to do and a regular practice for people working in some sensitive areas. The issue here is only that he deleted it after they started an investigation. The legal eagle video in the post says this explicitly that he would've been fine if he had wiped his phone prior to the flight.
- ImPostingOnHN 2mo ago> he would've been fine if he had wiped his phone prior to the flight. This comment assumes rule of law (a.k.a. a government constrained by laws). What if what we instead had was a government secretly tracking a dissident they didn't like, then searching them with a pretext and no legal justification. What would have likely happened in that case, is that the government accuses him of destroying evidence anyways, because they're mad the search didn't turn up anything incriminating, and his life gets ruined fighting against their retaliation for years, with no consequences for the actual offenders.
- karlgkk 2mo agowhat? I’m not allowed to have a new phone?
- JSR_FDED 2mo agoNo recent messages and no recent email would be a pretty big giveaway. It’s a lot of work to make the decoy part of the phone look genuine. Does the GPS trail of your running app show you were at a protest site? Better remember to remove that as well. What about all the photos you took on your trip - there’s location metadata in there. Maybe the messenger app stripped that out, but what about the one picture you sent by email - is that still in your offline Sent folder?
- TechDebtDevin 2mo ago[dead]
- sixothree 2mo agoMessages and email they could have gotten with a warrant. Everything on this phone was obtainable with a warrant.
- Taek 2mo agoDefinitely booting into a decoy system beats an automatic wipe.
- otterley 2mo agoLet’s not devise ways for people to break the law while evading detection, shall we?
- inigyou 2mo agoLet's. "When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty."
- eru 2mo ago> and during that time quietly erase the user's actual data. You only need to delete the necessary key. The 'actual' data should just look like random bits.
- deadbabe 2mo agoInstead of decoy passcode why not have secret passcode to access your illicit data? Then your normal passcode looks legit, while your illicit passcode keeps data leaks, zero days, cp, state secrets, manifestos, money laundering, etc, and the partition is encrypted at rest.
- inigyou 2mo agoGraphene thought of this but concluded there's no way to make it plausible enough and properly secure.
- cvoss 2mo agoIt's one thing to argue, even vehemently, that this should not be a felony (either as a matter of fact in this case, or as a matter of just law). But granting that it is or is liable to be prosecuted as such, I strongly recommend against giving advice on how to commit a felony and get away with it.