A U.S. citizen has asked a court to throw out the government's claim that he gave over a passcode to border authorities that wiped his phone's data, opening up fresh questions about a person's constitutional rights at the U.S. border.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
If you have iOS you can disable it quickly by spamming the power button (button on right hand side of screen) 5 times.
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.
Same with android
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.
I did that, and it tried to call 911
For me its power + volume up
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.
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.
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:
Ahhhh
thanks!
Once again fascists cry protecting kids to violate rights.
Every time I hear someone invoking “protect the kids” I know 3 things.
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.
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.