Ain’t that some BS
Friendly reminder that, per the fifth amendment, you are not required to disclose your passwords to the authorities under any circumstances. This protection does not apply to biometric authentication, so don’t enable those methods.
That’s honestly a curiosity in this for me. You dont have to unlock your phone for them but the fact that he was made to even with a duress pass makes me think that this was more than a standard stop.
He absolutely didnt have to unlock it under the law.
He was within his right to wipe it.
But what led him to doing so?
This isnt a defence of the boarder officers. Im just curious what the other side of the story is.
Edit: ah there it is. They suspected him of having csam and by implication being a sex tourist.
Heavy accusations. So they did have some suspicion (or at least claimed to) to justify the search.
From The Guardian article on the same incident:
The defendant, Sam Tunick, was stopped for interrogation at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport on 24 January last year, after vacationing in the Dominican Republic. Unbeknown to him, federal authorities had put him on a terrorism watchlist because of his alleged association with the movement against Cop City.
Ahhhh
thanks!
Once again fascists cry protecting kids to violate rights.
Every time I hear someone invoking “protect the kids” I know 3 things.
- It has nothing to do with protecting kids, they’re hiding their intention.
- It’s probably some outrageous bullshit they absolutely need to hide.
- It’s probably because they are fucking kids.
Number 3 was added recently because apparently based on the facts we now know… that is MUCH more common with these people than I could even imagine.
That’s why I stopped using Google for anything. Their AI is calling people child abusers left and right. And even after a person is cleared by law enforcement, they will not let that person get their data back. It could be innocent family photos or legal adult content. Haven’t used their services in years after the NYT articles and the several others from other news organizations that followed about their awful practices. They don’t care about correcting false positives only about the perception to share holders that they are fighting child abuse by closing almost a million accounts a year. Same for Meta, who closes many millions of account per year to stop child abuse, while hosting child abuse for advertisers. I didn’t supply links to the articles, but they can be easily found through a StartPage or DuckDuckGo search or which ever search engine you use (hopefully not Google).
The crazy thing is that tech CEOs hear that their bullshit machines are calling people pedos, so they look and at their own CEO social circles and see 50% are pedos, and think, “sounds about right”.
Then they ask Grok to undress another minor.
Since they just let him walk after the phone wiped itself, they clearly didn’t actually believe he was a risk of any kind. If there was any actual reason for suspicion they would/should have detained him outright.
He was put on a terrorist watchlist because he didnt want his tax dollars funding a cop city. Thats reason enough for the judge to throw this out.
Except of course that getting lifesentences for simply being an anti-fascist is now the tradition in the US.
There are some of us that know these things happen and take steps to protect our rights and personal data.
Most all of us here have multiple methods employed to avoid being tracked online via browser plugins or whatever. Some of us take it a step further and lock our phones should an encounter with LEOs be a possibility, and he had a wipe command to go even further.
These days the US is closer to a lot of fascist authoritarian states, and it’s probably only a short time before they throw people in jail for whatever manufactured reason because they wipe a phone before the Gestapo can pry into it and charge us with the crime of being un-American or some shit because we posted a meme mocking trump.
Doesn’t matter what his reasons were to wipe the device, that’s the point of privacy, not to hide criminal activities.
Yep.
Biometrics are SUPER unsafe, and insecure, because you can be physically forced to put your finger on a sensor, or to stand still for them to hold a phone infront of your face for faceid. I’ve literally seen videos of cops holding a guy in a choke hold whole another cop unlocks his phone with his face.
but they can’t physically manhandle you into typing in a password.
We aren’t quite to the torture for password stage yet.
even with torture, you’d have to voluntarily give up the password.
as opposed to biometrics, where they can literally just overpower you and force you to use it. Or use it when you’re unconscious… or maybe even after you’re dead.
and that still depends on you giving up the password.
Unlike biometrics, which can just be used by force.
I like to set my Biometrics to an odd finger instead of the expectation
Yep, that’ll slow them down as they make you use the other fingers until one works.
Gotta use the knuckle of your pinkie
Toe unlock for the win
That’s why I use my penis.
My old apple finger print scanner worked on my elbow wrinkles
If you have iOS you can disable it quickly by spamming the power button (button on right hand side of screen) 5 times.
Same with android
I did that, and it tried to call 911
For some android phones it’s a setting. I have long press with an option for Lockdown and 5 click duress
Not sure what the difference is between my adroid locking when I just tap the power button one ane when I enter lockdown mode after holding the power button. They both get to tge same needing to put in a pattern to unlock.
For me its power + volume up
Android varies a bit depending on the software/manufacturer. It was added in Android 9 but some software releases remove it.
By default it is not enabled. You can search settings for “Lockdown”, and then it will just be an option in the menu when you hold the power button.
Looks like it’s now a permanent item in the power menu. (I just got upgraded to Android 17 and couldn’t find it in settings, but it is on my power/reboot menu options already.) Thanks for the tip, I didn’t even realize Android had this.
The thing with android lockdown is that it turns back off as soon as you unlock it. For something like going to an airport, I would go into settings and disable “use biometrics to unlock” under the biometric settings. Lockdown is more of an “oh shit” button, if you have the time to do it properly make it stick until you’re safe.
Better to just turn the phone off if you’re in the power menu anyway. On boot up the phone requires a non-biometric credential to decrypt it.
Good to know - thanks for pointing that out. On my version, if I were to simply shut down my phone, it requires a pin to start - no biometrics - and (iirc) the data contained within is encrypted until the pin is entered. So the smart play would be to simply shut it off, giben the opportunity?
I’m not saying “don’t use lockdown” or “don’t turn it off”. What I’m saying is in addition to that if you need to unlock it while you’re in the airport then you want it to not be unlockable from that point with biometrics. You want the pin to kick back on by default after it’s been unlocked and relocked.
Depending on your skin color, reaching into your pocket to do this may be punishable by immediate execution. Just don’t use biometrics.
Depending on your skin color being pulled over is punishable by execution. It’s an easy way to disable it while handing it over if you have that chance.
And when the cop has you a gunpoint with your hands in the air, and their accomplice pills the phone out of your pocket?
Well then you’re fucked.
Maybe there’s A thing you can tell Siri to disable Face ID.
Cute that you think the Constitution still exists.
It is actually harder to torture a password out of someone than hold the phone up to their face.
Constitution ain’t got shit to do with that one way or another.
SECURE IN YOUR PERSONAL EFFECTS AND DOCUMENTS
-Bill of Suggestions
How is this illegal?
It’s not. Authoritarians want it to be.
I was kind of flabbergasted when a police office interviewed in this video just straight up said you have a right to privacy in your home, but as soon as you step out, gone.
But if he wants to spy on you in your home, suddenly there’s a perfectly valid reason (in hsi book) why your house is special and doesn’t get the right.
to be fair there’s a flip side to that too. I don’t want to be charged with invasion of privacy because I took a photo of my friend at a party and someone is in the background who sues me.
Guy was innocent until they had proof of a crime. They didnt have any proof so boohoo for them. And they charged him of damaging property. Its his property, and its not damaged.
The intent of the law was to have something to charge corporate fraudsters with if they destroyed the accounting records with proof of their fraud when served a warrant. Or illegal drug manufacturers destroying their chemlab. Ownership of the property doesn’t come into it.
The envisioned cases were always domestic crime investigations where there was already enough evidence to get a warrant. The application at customs where they don’t need a warrant is the novelty, and I really hope the government loses its case.
That isn’t their property. That belongs to the company.
Case should be thrown out and the prosecutors charged with something.
Unless he was subpoenaed is this a crime?
The laws are now made up when needed and justice doesn’t matter. So, yes. Anything the authorities don’t like is a crime in a fascist regime.
Kinda wild that most Americans are just going about their day while this is going on all around them.
They too busy getting by day by day, as designed by the billionaire-run system. Commuting back and forth possibly up to an hour each way, getting paid a fraction of what they should be, unable to afford a mortgage, little to savings, probably working paycheck to paycheck. Reliant on work for their insurance coverage for chronic issues that would otherwise cost tens of thousands of dollars because the medical system inflates all costs to justify its existence on paper. No time to research issues, reliant on things like an hour of TV news to inform them. And those are owned by the billionaires as well, pushing their propaganda and ignoring the real issues.
There are a lot of smaller independent things keeping people busy and stuck. While they almost all come back to the billionaires and end-stage capitalism, the propaganda from them is nearly inescapable for the average person.
This. Freaking thank you.
I called my reps to tell them to oppose the slew of bad Internet bills (badinternetbills.com) and even something so simple felt like I had to make myself an appointment to get around to it.
And it turns out I should be calling a lot more often. Oh boy.
Working class folks must struggle excessively to even be civically active while managing a ton of responsibilities domestically. That’s why you mostly see old people at local government stuff.
And these keyboard warriors are talking crap because we’re not forming militias and running weeklong campaigns against the secret police.
I really wish direct action was a lot more exciting but while we’re fighting for our rights, any number of dozens of private institutions are waiting eagerly to punish us into the pavement for missing payments.
Yeah this system needs to be rebuilt from scratch, but this is what we’re working with right now, and it sucks!
I really wish direct action was a lot more exciting but while we’re fighting for our rights, any number of dozens of private institutions are waiting eagerly to punish us into the pavement for missing payments.
And THOSE people are being paid by the billionaire class to do it as a job. Both on the lobbying front, and on the back end at the banks, debt collection, and other companies you work with and buy from daily that are beholden to their wall street shareholders that ONLY care about quarterly profits.
Americans have a false belief in their elections and that they can simply vote this away later. Or when that illusion is shattered, they often develop a political nihilism, having no further concept of political power.
This is not actually unique to Americans, either.
This is particularly frustrating amongst my Chinese friends who just absolutely trip over themselves to defend the status quo because one person can’t change the world etc.
The “not my problem” society.
Would be good to have our allies help but just like ww2 they don’t do fucking shit but cry.
Not our allies responsibility to help fix our country.
Especially when Americans are attacking their “allies”. Why the fuck should Canada help Americans when half their country is calling to annex us and actively economically attacking us for “wildfire smoke” (the same kind of thing we sent our own citizens to help the US with last year). Fuck that we’re done helping
Where have you been for the past 500 years that you think laws weren’t just “made up” before that? Standing here absolutely slapping the “stolen land” sign
“Wiping your phone before an illegal search is now left wing terrorism”
Doing anything fascist and their gestapo dislike is a crime. being written law or not doesnt matter.
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity.
No.
Good. We all need to set this up. Fuck ICE and TSA.
It exists for a reason, they couldn’t have shown better why if they’d been paid to film a commercial.
Even if he did, so what? His phone, his property, his business. He should be able to do what he wants.
a duress password?
What a neat idea.I wonder if i can set that up on my iphone.
There isnt, for iphone
But you can set it up to wipe the phone after 10 attempts
Probably. The “Shortcuts” scripting language is actually quite functional if not well documented.
Probably a good project for vibe coding.
Definitely download the “Pulled over by the cops” one.
It sends a text with your location to someone, turns off your screen, and starts recording video.
Good don’t give those fascist fucks anything.
He wasn’t being charged with anything at the time.
And…? There’s nothing illegal about wiping your phone if not already under indictment of something
Prosecutors later charged Tunick under a federal statute that makes it unlawful to knowingly destroy or damage property to prevent authorities from seizing it. Tunick has pleaded not guilty.
Security experts also said they had not seen charges brought in this way before.
“With a little planning ahead of time, you can always download the data you need once you get to where you’re going,” said Sandvik.
Zip it with a password. Upload it a couple of places, download it when you get home. Simple as. Anyone can do it.
Anyone can do it.
Are you sure? My mom can’t tell the difference between posting on Facebook and doing a Google search.
This site has an insane amount of people who don’t understand how inept the average person is at using technology.
Yes. Like every time someone says “oh just do X because you have device Z” and you ask, “ok, but what about if I have y” and people come out of the woodwork to downvote you because you don’t own device Z, you own device R.
When it is said that anyone can do x, I generally take that to mean that the means and methods are available to everyone if they cared to look, not that everyone already knows how to do that thing.
Yes, and thank you.
My Mom’s VCR says the time is 12:00.
Can you mail it to me? I could really use it. I have like 1,000 VHS tapes and both my VCRs died.
Try thrift shops and eBay. I converted all my tapes, but still need to hang onto my vcrs because various friends and relatives keep asking me to convert.
tell her to search google for her secret, then when she gets home, ask her friends
Yeah like one time I called her “Mom, what about ‘[Local Grocery Store]’?” she didn’t even stop to question why I was asking she just went on “I was looking up their phone number on the computer but the computer didn’t do what I told it to, it just showed me all my friends posts instead.”
I’m 40 and I have no idea how to do that. I could Google it but am too lazy
Android doesn’t have as easy an option. iPhone users if they pay for iCloud storage would just wipe the device and when they get to their destination with wifi restore via iCloud.
If they don’t pay for iCloud storage they can still go to transfer or reset and kick off a temp storage where it’ll back up their whole phone for 21 days so once backed up they can wipe it an restore later. (It was designed for if a device needs to be dropped off for repair or traded in, but it would work for this as well)
I’m 38 and I do it. Level-up, Grandpa. Your age can’t be your excuse forever. And we say young people don’t like to read, fml…
The thing is, data isn’t just property. It is also speech. The right to remain silent is so fundamental to the legal system that a whole case can be thrown out if you are not reminded of this right while being arrested.
You have a right to remain silent but you don’t have a right to lie. This is super important legally. If you’re asked “what is your device pin” and you say nothing you’re OK, but if you say “my pin is 12345” and that’s actually your duress PIN then you can be in trouble for that.
I was speaking more broadly about the constitutionality of being charged under a destruction of property statute. In a sense, deleting your data is choosing to remain silent.
Well, they didn’t ask for the non-duress pin…
Technically, the agent who entered the code should be in trouble.
My iPhone is backed up in the cloud and it’s a matter of minutes to restore it, though the data can take longer to appear. It’s not a real big deal for me to lose my phone, cost aside.
Why zip it? Just use end to end encrypted remote storage
sir, your phone… SIR
“Just 20 more minutes, officer… also, what’s the wifi password in here?”
Not sure who your comment is targeted at. In both instances of zipping it or using end-to-end encryption here, these are done prior to any encounter with officers. Zipping stuff or enabling end-to-end encryption during a search and/or seizure is too late in all cases.
That’s the joke.
Over my head, ig. Sorry.
If border patrol claims they don’t need a warrant because he’s not in the US yet, then how does border patrol have jurisdiction?
It’s been established that anywhere within 100 miles of a “point of entry” to the US is under CBP jurisdiction. That means any airport with international flights, ports, and of course the Canadian/Mexican border
Edit: That 100 miles doesn’t extend from inland international airports. It only applies at the airport
Nearly two thirds of the population of the USA live within that 100 mile range.
Not just ports, but the entire shoreline - Atlantic, Pacific, Arctic, Gulf, it doesn’t matter.
I like this guy. Oh, you wanna see my phone? Fine, here ya go asshole.
My password is the text of the 4th Amendment. I don’t unlock my phone often.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
No need for a warrant, and the 4th amendment doesn’t apply in this case.
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity.
They have near autonomy to search you and your belongings for any reason upon entering the country.
We don’t have to let them. We can fight it to make change happen.
And we should. They are no masters.
Trying to fight them when you’re re-entering the border I guarantee you will lose. If you want to fight them, you do it in court.
But you do you
If you want to fight them in court, you need standing. To have standing, you have to have been affected by the law.
You can not fight them in court until they do something. You can not sue for what someone might do.
Unless you make up a case about gay people demanding you bake a wedding cake, then you can win at the Supreme Court.
This is no longer true. The Republican idiots on the Supreme Court have made a habit of ruling for plaintiffs with demonstrably zero standing. There is no longer rule of law in this country.
Is it true that you have to have standing to fight them in court, yes.
But to be completely honest, 99% of the people have no interest in actually going to court . they figure they can just fight them while standing in line.
You’re contradicting yourself.
Trying to fight them when you’re re-entering the border I guarantee you will lose. If you want to fight them, you do it in court.
There’s an implied “instead” in there. You’re saying don’t fight them at the border, because you will lose. INSTEAD, fight them in court.
To fight them in court, you have to have standing. You get standing by fighting them at the border and losing.
I’m not contradicting myself, you’re just not understanding what’s being said there.
So let me spell it out for you. If a person thinks they can just stand at the border and just fight it. And that’s it. And win. No they’re going to fail. Damn near every single time. It’s kind of like trying to argue with a cop alongside the road. Good luck you’re basically not going to win.
Now, if your intent is to fight in court, if that is your end goal, then yes you would have to fight it at the border. You have to say something at the border so then you have legal standing.
The point of my statement was 99% of the people have no intention going into the courtroom, so therefore there’s no point in fighting at the border because they’re going to lose at the border.
It’s like people pretend to know the law, but don’t actually understand shit.
deleted by creator
I’m not convinced this applies here as it’s discussing traffic stops to look for illegal immigrants and contraband near land border crossings. The article is referencing an American citizen getting detained and having his phone searched in the Atlanta airport without probable cause or a warrant.
This is exactly describing that if you read the part that I quoted it specifically quotes upon entering the United States. At an international border. And air flight at an international airport is an international border. And they do not require a warrant. It’s already been settled in a court of law although as we can see that can be overturned however it would be very difficult to do so
That doesn’t mean agents have a free-for-all to do whatever they want at the border. Would you assume agents can just imprison anyone or perform warrantless searches at homes along the border too? There’s a lot more nuance to this than what you think and seizing a device chock full of personal information and private communication is a lot more invasive than someone performing a routine, (from your quote) fairly non-invasive visual inspection of a vehicle looking for entire human beings.
There isn’t nuance. You are bringing up things beyond the scope of the conversation and article to try to prove something you can’t.
Article states: man enters country. Border patrol requests search of phone. Man is accused of wiping phone.
Person states: 4th amendment says you cannot search me for no reason!
Court says: yea, actually they can.
Person states: nuh uh. You can’t, I’ll take it to court, we can fight this!
I state: sorry, already been to court. The law says, yea, they can.
Person states: nuh uh! Cause what if this, or what if that! Random bullshit that doesn’t have anything to do specifically with this situation, or anything.
Whatever dude. You want to win. Go ahead. You win. Keep moving your own goal posts to try to prove something unprovable.
