• carl_dungeon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    181
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Last week, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California released a ruling that concluded state highway police were acting lawfully when they forcibly unlocked a suspect’s phone using their fingerprint.

    You can turn that and Face ID off on iOS by mashing the power button 5 times- it locks everything down.

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      78
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve always wanted a setting to create a lockdown key and an unlock key. So something like middle-finger to unlock but index-finger to force it into PIN/password only mode. So you can have some convenience of a quick unlock but if an authority figure asks or forces you to unlock it you can one-tap lock it down.

    • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      68
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      ⚠️ WARNING: On android, mashing the power button 5 times calls emergency services…

      • UnityDevice@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        There are two ways you can do this on Android currently, but they’re not as quick. You can try to unlock with the wrong finger 5 times and it will stop allowing fingerprint unlocks. Or, you can hold down the power button for 10 seconds and the phone will reboot and also disable fingerprint unlocking.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Not on my Pixel 6. 🤷‍♂️ It just does what I told it to do, namely to open the camera.

        Edit: these are some Reddit down votes. I just didn’t know I had this feature, and I apparently have disabled it, but I don’t remember doing so. Oh well.

        • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Cool, you disabled the gesture. Clearly the default SO setting doesn’t apply to you…

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I didn’t even know it existed. I had to search to find the setting, but I see it exists on my phone and it’s disabled. I don’t recall disabling it though.

        • then_three_more@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Have to tried? On my Samsung pressing twice does the camera (as I’ve set it to) but doing 5 times tries to call emergency services.

          • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            They disabled it . I don’t understand why they even commented. It reads like some weird flex

            • then_three_more@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I don’t know how it sounds like a weird flex. I was just asking. I don’t remember if it was something you could disable or not from when I had my pixel 5.

            • 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Right, correcting your incorrect information is “weird flex”. What are you, five?

              On my Mi Max 3 it does not work as well. In “configure buttons” section of menu there is no call emergency number action, neither is there press [any button] five times trigger available. So clearly the function your phone has is not universal. What a wild world do we live in!

              • Victor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Thank you for defending me. ❤️ They were correct though. Apparently I had the setting disabled, but I don’t remember doing so. Must have been years ago on another phone? And then carried over when settings migrated? I don’t know when this feature was introduced. But yeah. It’s a thing.

                But obviously not universal if you don’t have it. Which Android version are you on?

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              I didn’t even know it existed. I had to search to find the setting, but I see it exists on my phone and it’s disabled. I don’t recall disabling it though.

              It’s not a flex… 🙄 I was just confused about how it seemed so established that this was an “Android” feature, so should be activated on my phone too, but it isn’t. And now that I see I have the functionality disabled but people say it’s the default, I’m even more confused because I don’t remember even seeing this setting. 🤷‍♂️

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I did, yeah. Gotta test before commenting, of course. I see I have the setting disabled for some reason. Don’t recall disabling it though.

    • MostlyGibberish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      7 months ago

      Android has a similar feature. It’s called “Lockdown mode” on the shutdown menu. Locks the phone and turns off any biometric unlocks.

      • Bonehead@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Except it doesn’t activate by mashing the power button 5 times. On my Pixel 8, that activates the emergency dialer that will automatically call 911 if you don’t cancel the prompt in 5 seconds. I did not know that before. Probably a better use for that feature. It also points out the different ideologies of Apple vs Android.

        • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 months ago

          My wife’s pixel 3(?) with a flaky power button had us wake up to cops knocking on the door because of that feature.

        • Dojan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          On iOS, for SOS, Medical ID, and “slide to power off” you hold power and a volume button. That also disables biometric ID.

          • Bonehead@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            On my 8, that just activates the Google assistant. To get to the power menu, you have to press power (oddly named button, to be honest) and vol up at the same time. But these are active acts that you have to think about and verify to make sure they did what they are supposed to. Mashing the power button 5 times is succinct. I don’t have to guess how many seconds I’ve waited. I don’t have to feel to make sure I’m hitting the vol up instead of vol down accidentally. I count 5 times, 6 to make sure, and I can drop it while being certain that it’s going to call 911. That’s what I want in an emergency. A quick distinct action that requires no guessing to make sure it works. It makes sense once you stop and think. Nothing else about the power button makes sense, but at least that part does.

            • Today@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Try system - gestures - press power button. I have the choice of the power menu or the digital assistant.

              • Bonehead@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I could do that…but then I lose easy access to the assistant. I could set up the tap on back function, but that doesn’t work when it’s in a holder in the car. There are no options that I can find that would let me assign the assistant to open on power + vol up. Unfortunately these phones aren’t as customizable as as I’d like them to be. Or at least not by default, but I don’t want to go through the trouble of flashing a new OS yet.

                • Today@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I use, “hey Google,” but sometimes my car tries to answer and it doesn’t know as much stuff.

        • tamiya_tt02@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          On my Pixel 7 Pro, I press the power and volume up buttons simultaneously, then I can click Lockdown. Now my passcode is required to unlock the phone.

          • pirat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            On my ditto (running GrapheneOS), the Lockdown option is accessible through the regular power button menu. When I press power+volumeUp it switches to silent mode. I don’t know if/where I changed this, since I can’t find the options when searching in settings.

            EDIT: I just found it - in Settings > System > Gestures > Prevent ringing. I can either set power+volumeUp to mute the phone, or vibrate only. Nothing about the Lockdown option, but having it in the regular power button menu is good enough for me.

        • Tiefa@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I was mowing my lawn and learned about that feature. A nice ladies voice came through my bluetooth headphones asking if I needed help lol. You can change what the button spam does and I changed it to call my mom instead.

    • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      6 months ago

      In a getting pulled over situation, this works. But do it before you go protest anything. Or better yet, leave your phone at home. You don’t want to be reaching for something while a cop is pointing a gun at you and saying “Hands up!”

    • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      That’s terrifying. So once we have tech to forcibly see inside the brain, that will be legal too?

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        “You shouldn’t be worried if you have nothing to hide” 🤷‍♂️

        Tap for spoiler

        /s

      • kevincox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Probably. Wouldn’t it be good to have the truth during investigations?

        However I think that we really need refine when warrantless searches can occur. Right now many searches seem to be done with very little evidence to justify them. I think this protection should apply to your mind and phone just like it applies to your house. This probably also needs to be considered at border crossings. Right now they have basically unlimited rights for searching what you have on you with little to no evidence.

        We should probably also rethink about how the information is shared when there is a warrant. Right now during a trial a huge amount of personal information can be made available. Maybe if it was easier to get precise information less would be needed.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          However I think that we really need refine when warrantless searches can occur. Right now many searches seem to be done with very little evidence to justify them. I think this protection should apply to your mind and phone just like it applies to your house. This probably also needs to be considered at border crossings. Right now they have basically unlimited rights for searching what you have on you with little to no evidence.

          to be fair to the current justice system, a lot of times you can just hit the courts with “excuse me sir, this was unwarranted” and assuming it was actually unwarranted, they should overthrow it immediately.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not if it comes with a level of invasiveness that is unforgivable it wouldn’t be.

          Forcibly invading someone’s mind after they were convicted beyond reasonable doubt would make you a monster.

          • kevincox@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Most trials and discoveries are already incredibly invasive. I don’t really see why the mind should be treated much differently. I would rather define what is acceptable evasiveness generally than different for mind vs written down in my diary.

            Also why would you do this after they are convicted beyond reasonable doubt? This should only be done when required to reach the conclusion. Just like avoiding physical searches you can just plead guilty if you don’t want to be investigated.

            If used properly this could actually be less invasive. Imagine a quick check of some facts that you believe with an automated machine that only returns the basic required information and you could be removed from the suspect list before other searches need to be done (like lawyers searching through your emails or personal notes).

            I agree that this is a very dangerous thing to consider, and it needs to be applied very carefully. But I don’t think it is in the abstract any more morally wrong than the current methods of evidence gathering that we currently do. In many ways it could potentially be less harmful to the person being investigated. However it will be impossible to know for sure until we know how exactly this technology (when it is developed) works.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              No, mind reading is a hundred orders of magnitude more invasive than any possible search.

              There is no possible scenario where it could ever possibly be justified or excused. Your brain is unconditionally sacred. There is no possible theoretical version of such technology that could ever not be pure, unforgivable evil to use without completely uncoerced consent.

    • ccunning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      You can also just long press a volume button with the lock button (with a FaceID phone). I find this harder to mess up under stress.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      Assuming you have the access to do this, e.g. awake, conscious, not handcuffed, etc. It’s safer to just always use a PIN in the first place.

  • TheFriar@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    137
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Further advice regarding civil disobedience:

    LEAVE YOUR PHONES AT HOME. Write down some numbers in case you get arrested—or better yet, memorize them. There are journalists there for documenting. And there will be plenty of other people that don’t follow this advice. Leave anything they could use as leverage over you and your cohorts away. Don’t bring ID. Don’t bring anything except what you need for the action. It’s not worth the risk.

    ETA: also, any of you with a new car? DONT DRIVE THAT SHIT TO ANY MEETING OR PROTEST. They’re spying on you. Don’t post about it. Don’t use any unencrypted messaging service to coordinate it—WhatsApp is not safe. Signal and probably some other less common ones are the only ones safe enough. Ride a bike there, stash it in a conveniently hidden spot. Bring a change of clothes, plan escape routes, plant the change of clothes either hidden on your escape route or wear them under your plain clothes. Cover tattoos. Leftist activists are not safe. And literally the rest of your life could depend upon how well protected you have made yourself.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/feb/10/felony-charges-pipeline-protesters-line-3

    So many states have pretty quietly passed laws to make you a felon for protesting. Even peacefully. And to make you a fuckin corpse. In the south especially, a few states were writing “go ahead, run over any protester in the road” laws.

    Be smart. Be safe. Have a plan. Have a contingency plan. This isn’t “fuck around with the blunt end of the justice system and find out” territory, in 2024 US, it’s time to be as safe as you can while doing what’s right. Because doing what’s right is criminalized. Heavily.

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      If you’re going somewhere where you think you might be at risk, IMHO, it’s probably just easier to turn your phone off. Android and iOS both require a non-biometric passcode after boot.

      Or, if you want to keep your phone on, enable lockdown mode on Android, or tap power 5 times on iOS to require a non-biometric password at the next unlock.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s never a good idea to bring your phone with you. It can be used, even while powered off, to track and surveil you. The BLM protests were just the tip of the iceberg. The apps you have on your phone track you. The government is buying that tracking data. Your phone is a massive privacy weak point. It’s basically a bug you carry on you willingly. It’s not safe. Period.

        https://theconversation.com/police-surveillance-of-black-lives-matter-shows-the-danger-technology-poses-to-democracy-142194

        https://www.vox.com/recode/22565926/police-law-enforcement-data-warrant

        Leave your phone at home. It’s not worth it. It may not bite you in the ass the day of, but could very easily come back to haunt you after they investigate, in case anything goes “wrong” in their eyes. It’s just not worth it.

        • Jesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          IMHO, as someone that works in security / privacy, I tend not to view it as a binary thing. It depends on where you live, what you’re protesting, what you look like, who you are, etc.

          Are you in Russia or China and are protesting the government? Yeah, I might leave that thing at home. Are you a white lady in San Francisco marching with a pink knit cat hat during brunch hours, then you’re probably well on the other side of the risk spectrum. You might actually be introducing more risk by having less immediate access to communication or a camera.

          IMHO, it’s nuanced.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The problem is that the people doing the surveillance are hardly going around honestly telling people what’s their surveillance profile.

            For example in the UK that “pink knit cat hat white lady” would very likely be under surveillance if she was a member of the Green Party and participated in demonstrations. In fact, recently a number of cases came out where in the 80s and 90s the police had infiltrated Ecologist groups and even left some of the women in those groups pregnant with the children of men they late found out were undercover agents.

            Further, the lower the barrier to entry to surveillance the lower the “threat profile” needed to end up under surveillance: if the authorities have already have well established and commonly used processes backed by ultra-broad surveillance court (or whatever those courts are called in your country) orders to just get from the mobile network providers all the phone numbers that connect to specific cell towers during a specific time period (such as the ones nearer a demonstration during that demonstratiom), pink knit cat lady is going to end up in the list just as easilly as baclava-wearing hard-core anarchist looking to break stuff.

            They might not hack the pink knit cat hat lady’s mobile to install eavesdropping software, but she’s still in the list for every demonstration she attended carrying her phone and for the authorities finding out those who were at multiple demonstration and cross-searching with other databases to resolve those numbers to actual identities is pretty easy unless those people jumped through hops to keep those things disconnected (which, funny enough, smart anarchists are more likely to have done than your average pink knit cat hat lady)

            • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I agree with your point, but balaclava is the hat, baclava is the delicious Greek pastry.

            • Jesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              We take on risk every time we decide to wake up and start the day.

              I live in a place where I’m considerably more likely to get hit by a car while walking than thrown in jail as a political prisoner. That doesn’t mean I’m never going to go for a walk. I’m going to live life.

              Leaving my phone at home seems pretty silly when the risk is very low in my nation and I do riskier things while cooking dinner.

              • Aceticon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Oh, in day to day usage I agree with you: we’re all one little uninteresting datapoint in a whole lot of datapoints and there are plenty of other ways in which we are tracked.

                However if you’re part of a Political Party or Movement and/or attend demonstrations, it’s probably wiser to leave the phone at home, if only because that makes you stand out as a much more interesting datapoint than average.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think the fact that we are able to record everything that happens and automatically upload it seriously outweighs what you are saying.

          The only reason cops get in trouble is only because people are filming. If it’s not caught on camera, it didn’t happen in the eyes of the law if it’s just our word against a cops.

          • TheFriar@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            It’s your life. This advice is important in more active circles. There are also jobs that should be given out. Just like there are medics that come out, there should be journalists—in leftist action circles, this isn’t EMTs and NBC photographers. See what I’m saying?

            It’s ultimately your choice. But depending on what’s happening, the cause, the state, the cops, the current state of the govt of the country, etc., this advice can literally be invaluable.

            • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              For 200-250$ you can get very decent used compact cameras (like the RX 100). It won’t upload the photos immediatly, but it is still pretty much on par with most current cell phones.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          It can be used, even while powered off, to track and surveil you.

          How? The only legit thing I can think of is if they are tracking you anyway, and then they see your phone is turned off, they might try to claim that you must be up to something. But they won’t be able to track it while it’s off.

            • dhork@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              That’s not quite how it works, though. These devices are basically mini computers now, there’s a limit to what they can do without fully booting. Devices that are plugged into the wall might be likely to retain some power-draining function while plugged in, but there’s only so much you can do on a trickle charge while a phone is powered off.

              • Aceticon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                They’re still running in low power mode and can wakeup from the network so they can absolutelly be made to “boot up” without turning the screen on and you being aware of it.

                This is not like a bloody PC were the lights turn on and you can hear the fans when the thing starts, it’s a machine with a low power mode in which it can already do a lot and which can be brought to a high power mode if needed without there being any visible or audible side-effects to alert the user.

                Unless you completelly cut it off from power (by taking the battery out, which you can’t in most modern smartphones) that smartphone with the lights off, the screen off and making no sound at all can just as easilly be in low power mode waiting for you to press the On button, as it can be in full power mode with a mobile network connection active, accessing the microphone and the GPS microchip and sending that data out, and both will look exactly the same from the outside.

                • dhork@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I think you are overestimating what these devices can do when turned off, specifically when whoever is doing the tracking wants to be covert. Devices like Cellular Radios and GPS chipsets are getting more efficient every year, but they still consume enough power that it would be noticed if they came on by themselves even if the device was off.

          • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            let’s put aside everything @Aceticon@lemmy.world wrote you; if the French state was trying to legalize exactly this, it must be possible: la validation pure et simple de l’activation à distance des fonctions de géolocalisation de téléphone et autres objets connectés (voiture, balises airtag, montre etc) qui repose exactement sur le même procédé technique que le dispositif censuré : la compromission d’un périphérique, en y accédant directement ou par l’intermédiaire d’un logiciel espion pour en prendre le contrôle à distance.

            source

            wasn’t the scandal about the Pegasus spyware all about this imperceptibility?

            • dhork@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Nothing in your links above indicate that the spyware operates while the phones are powered off (although I relied on a crappy translation of the French). Could spyware mock the shutdown process so that it looks like the phone is powered off while the phone is actually running? Sure it can, but the victim will be tipped off when the phone’s battery is being drained even while it is “shut off”. (And someone who is paranoid enough to shut down their phone would pay attention to that.) . It seems like it’s not worth the effort.

              • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                read, listen to people that were spied on using the pegasus software. Easy to find

                i don’t know if you’ve met any real activists, militants in your life but they’re rarely geeks. And checking the battery of their phone or reading about battery life isn’t one of their priorities

                • dhork@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Yes, info on Pegasus is easy to find. And never says Pegasus is active when the phone is powered off. It’s undetectable and insidious in what it can grab, but at no point is there any reference at all to being active while the phone is powered off.

                  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware)

                  If you have a reference that states otherwise (that isn’t written by an AI), please supply it. I’ll be happy to give up on this if someone can prove their point.

                  And that is because it is way too easy to detect when the phone is off, not only because of the battery drain, but because the radios would be transmitting when they shouldnt . Plus, persisting across a reboot requires some trace of the Trojan to be on physical storage, which is more likely to be found on a scan.

                  I am assuming that when a state-level actor is hacking a phone, they are targeting a person directly, and know how to get the Trojan on undetected. Their main goal will be to continue to siphon data off it while it is in use. It’s not worth the risk of detection to track it while it is off (and not being used, after all.) Don’t you think they would prefer to use the same method they used the first time to infect the burner phone that’s actually being used?

      • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        The concern with bringing your phone is that police have subpoenaed cell providers to force them to turn over cell tower records. The police then used the lists of cell phones connected to those towers to track down protestors.

        You shouldn’t bring your phone to a protest because it could end with police kicking your front door in three weeks after the protest has wrapped up.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        And completely cover any tattoos. Even more identifiable than your face, honestly.

        • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          you can always modify your tattoos, you can’t modify your face once it’s identified. I saw a man literally draw a face on his face before attending a protest. He looked ridiculous but perfectly “defaced”.

          I’ve also read about some blackBlocs getting identified, where i live, through their shoes. Police photographed people before and after the movement and their shoes are used as identifying information.

          There is always the oldBloc who put their faces and names behind their words and proudly struggle through unions.

          it’s already may 1st here. They will be out in about 10 hours. May the force be with them.

    • TechnoMystic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Maybe get a dumb burner phone with no personal data on it. You could potentially keep your main phone in a secret/secure pocket.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        No. Several Jan 6 participants tried burners and they still got caught because the burners were still linked to their movements and activities and their personal phones were unusually unused/off/immobile for the amount of time the burners were used. You would have to expend a lot of effort to make sure your burner was completely disconnected from yours and your phone’s location, as well as making sure your phone showed signs of appropriate activity in your absence.

        Not so easy.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Just having a burner phone works against dragnet surveillance if one is not doing really stupid shit like logging in to one’s personal social media accounts from one.

          If however it’s an actual crime which actually gets investigated by actual criminal investigators, they’re going to be coming at it individually and using much more specific techniques than just “use a surveillance warrant to get a list of all mobile phones that connected to certain cell towers at certain points in time and plonk them all on a database to cross-check with similar data from other demonstrations”.

          You can’t just treat a burner phone as a second phone that you have active anywhere near your home, place of work or places you normally frequent and you can’t just keep it and keep on using it for a long period of time: the longer one holds on to that burner phone the more data points there will be that can be bulk checked with other, identifyable, data from other sources (say, car tracking data) to find out a more than normal overlap.

          I wouldn’t at all be surprised if those people with the burner phones had them with them active whilst ridding their personal vehicles which had something like OnStar or were dumb enough to log-in to their Facebook account from them.

  • sramder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    6 months ago

    The article pretty plainly says the guy was coerced into entering his password. So the headline feels a bit manipulative.

      • indog@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        So he was “only” coerced, ie likely verbally abused and lied to (which cops are allowed to do) about the consequences of refusing to unlock, instead of being physically forced. Such freedom.

          • indog@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            “The general consensus has been that there is more Fifth Amendment protection for passwords than there is for biometrics,” Andrew Crocker, the Surveillance Litigation Director at the EFF, told Gizmodo in a phone interview. “The 5th Amendment is centered on whether you have to use the contents of your mind when you’re being asked to do something by the police and turning over your password telling them your password is pretty obviously revealing what’s in your mind.”

              • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                The cops can coerce or force you to use biometrics to unlock your phone, but they can’t coerce you into giving up your passcode without a warrant.

      • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Lemmy quality descended quite quickly. What’s the more intelligent tech community alternative besides hacker news?

        It seems everything descends into this samey mess of america bad, eat the rich which I don’t dispute with but I am here for tech and not politics honestly. Time and place for everything.

        The amount of low effort comments that seem to only be about points/validation which aren’t even visible for some is tiring.

        It used to be that you would look into comments for useful information about the posted article. Now you can skip the comments altogether and the posted links quality also became questionable.

        I miss times where you could find links to some niche but full of creativity/usefulness websites in the comments or posts. Those juicy gems of the web. Or learn some fact that you had no idea about.

        I want to learn something new being here. Not make my brain feel good with the reward of validation.

        • sramder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Take a deep breath and tell us how you really feel ;-)

          I got here a bit late and it seemed like there was some decent discussion going on. Practical advice on how to lock various phones.

          Some high quality pasta about how to survive the coming civil war ;-) Honestly good advice for anyone considering civil unrest there.

          It’s small, but what’s really missing here? Someone dragging up the constitution? Being forced to incriminate yourself is wrong and any evidence gleaned should be inadmissible. Cops shouldn’t manipulate people into giving up their rights… but that’s the country we live in.

          Reddit was a wash in low effort feel good upvote nonsense too. It just got buried faster.

          To each his own but until I have time to post a bunch of high quality content, I’m not going to complain so bitterly.

          • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I am just annoyed that those sites became so mainstream that’s all. It always gets shitty then but if it is really good it is unavoidable.

            I guess the key is to make it bad enough so normal fans won’t touch it but good enough so that some of us enjoyers will enjoy it

            • sramder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I think they were victims of their own success weren’t they? Gawker was already kind of a tech-tabloid, happy to report rumors (which were often true or at least truth adjacent).

              That kinda made them popular with both hardboiled techies who wanted to know when my shit was going to come rolling down, and regular folks who just wanted some good gossip… maybe wanted to touch our feet or whatever ;-)

              With that success and the capital investment it garnered Gawker bought up all the good tech news sites.

              Unable to produce meaningful content for that many sites on the limited budget their investors demanded Gawker invented the listical. And humanity wept —and kept clicking for some damn reason 🤨

              Many years passed and the listical was clearly dying, so Gawker sought out a real zinger to boost their profile… I’m a bit hazy on the details, but it sounds like Peter Teal fucked them up the ass with Hulk Hogan‘s penis. 

              At least that’s how I remember it ;-)

        • Masterblaster420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          and this is why lemmy is a limp-wristed do-nothing. too many people here want to stick their head in the sand. but by all means, pls share some more star trek memes.

          • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I mean I have curated my ‘All’ only to non world news and non memes comms and I was left with literally nothing except this community. There is literally nothing here :/

            I will still keep using it whenever I can though just out of principle and to curb some of my Reddit addictions.

            I am sorry to say nowadays 95% of content appears to be meaningless. Not contributing anything, not creative, not even funny lots of the times. I won’t sugar coat this

              • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                See I have this weird feeling that we are too different to even connect somehow. You didn’t even read my comment. Any benefit of doubt of mine is pointless when you just throw some out of place, bland one liner and don’t even want to discuss anything. It’s like talking to a wall

                • Masterblaster420@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I don’t want to have a discussion. I want to unify a disgruntled public so we can make change for the better. Get friends if you just want to have a discussion. All I’m here to do is to get you to say it with me:

                  EAT. THE. RICH.

    • indog@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      However, the panel said the evidence from his phone was lawfully acquired “because it required no cognitive exertion, placing it in the same category as a blood draw or a fingerprint taken at booking…"

      If the precedent is that unlocking the phone is the same category as fingerprint taking, well, what happens if you refuse to be “coerced” into having your prints taken? Even if the legal precedent isn’t fully understood, it looks like the reasoning here isn’t based on whether there was physical force applied, but whether the search required the contents of the person’s mind.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I do t know about fingerprints but I thought a blood draw required cooperation or court order

        • Railing5132@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          In many (if not most) US jurisdictions, operating a vehicle under a driver’s license specifically implies consent to a blood draw when under suspicion of impaired driving.

  • IzzyScissor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    6 months ago

    It’s frustrating to no end that fingerprints and face ID are treated like passwords when they should be treated like usernames.

    • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      They make sense as a 2FA. It would be really cool if I could require either PIN+fingerprint or a long recovery password.

  • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    ## How to disable Face ID through the Power Off screen

    1. Hold down both the Side Button and either Volume Button at the same time for three seconds.
    2. The Power Off slider should appear. Tap Cancel.

    You actually don’t need to hit cancel, you can just hit lock, so you can do this whole thing with your phone in your pocket.

    https://appleinsider.com/inside/iphone/tips/how-to-quickly-disable-face-id

    This is easier and less intrusive than the lock-button-5-times method because it doesn’t start making a phone call that you have to quickly cancel.

    • Shrank7242@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is the advice people (with iOS) should follow, not disabling biometrics altogether. Using FaceID or TouchID prevents shoulder surfing to find out what the password to your phone is. When local passwords have so much control over a device, using biometrics to prevent anyone from seeing what your passcode is is very useful.

  • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    FYI Androids have a feature for this. If you are ever forced to interact with a cop you can press the side button and volume up(might be different on other phones) to select lockdown which will force your phone to only be opened with the password. Its gross that we need this feature, but now you know.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      iPhones do this too. Hold the lock and volume down button until your phone buzzes, to get to the SOS/reboot screen. Once that screen is activated, it’ll disable biometrics until the passcode is entered.

      You can even take photos/videos with the locked phone, and the recordings won’t be able to be deleted from your iCloud until the passcode is entered. Handy for recording cops. Cuz even if they take your phone and delete the recording, it’ll still sit in your “Recently Deleted” for 30 days. And while the phone is locked, they can’t access that Recently Deleted folder to permanently wipe it. So you can just access your iCloud account from any computer and recover the “deleted” footage.

    • eronth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, but I want a combo that force starts the feature. I want to pull out my phone and be able to blind start it, not stare at my screen to select the correct thing.

      • Aido@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I have Button Mapper trigger a Tasker task that locks my phone when I hold the volume down button, for some reason Button Mapper’s lock doesn’t trigger a lockdown.

        (Tap and hold still lowers the volume)

    • indog@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s good that they have this, but there are a lot of situations involving cops where it’s not going to be safe to stick your hand in your pocket. I’ll just leave the biometrics off on my devices.

    • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Edit: Maybe:

      You can instead hold the power button for 1 second to open the same menu. Feels easier to me.

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    Maybe don’t live in a fucking dystopia. The US is a police state and you have no freedom left.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      While I buy you’re general cynicism, it’s wrongly applied here …

      It seems like we have both more and less protections than other places, for this instance.

      • while it’s not entirely settled case law, you can NOT be compelled to give up your passwords. Different states differ and they’re constantly trying
      • however biometrics are counted as public knowledge, so you have no protections

      This is more of a scenario where legal contortions turn into huge inconsistencies, plus our legislature has refused to clarify so it’s all on the court system

  • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Terrible article. Even worse advice.

    On iOS at least, if you’re concerned about police breaking into your phone, you should be using a high entropy password, not a numeric PIN, and biometric auth is the best way to keep your convenience (and sanity) intact without compromising your security. This is because there is software that can break into a locked phone (even one that has biometrics disabled) by brute forcing the PIN, bypassing the 10 attempts limit if set, as well as not triggering iOS’s brute force protections, like forcing delays between attempts. If your password is sufficiently complex, then you’re more likely to be safe against such an attack.

    I suspect the same is true on Android.

    Such a search is supposed to require a warrant, but the tool itself doesn’t check for it, so you have to trust the individual LEOs in question to follow the law. And given that any 6 digit PIN can be brute forced in under 11 hours (40 ms per entry), this means that if you were arrested (even for a spurious charge) and held overnight, they could search your phone without you knowing.

    With a password that has the same entropy as 10 random digits, assuming no further vulnerabilities allowing them to speed up the process, it could take up to 12 and a half years to brute force it. Make it alphanumeric (and still random) and it’s millions of years - infeasible within our lifetime - it’s basically a question of whether another vulnerability is already known or is discovered that enables bypassing the password entirely / much faster rates of entry.

    If you’re in a situation where you expect to interact with law enforcement, then disable biometrics. Practice ahead of time to make sure you know how to do it on your phone.

    • ashok36@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Or they make a copy of your phone, alphanumeric password and all, and just sit on it for ten years until quantum computers make solving the password a piece of cake.

      You should assume that any device confiscated by authorities will be copied and broken into eventually. Treat all data on said device as if it’s already compromised.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        Copying an iPhone isn’t as straightforward as you seem to think. Copying data from a locked iPhone requires either an exploit or direct access to the SSD / memory chips on the device (basically, chip-off forensics, which likely requires bypassing the storage controllers), and I assume the same is true for Android devices.

        I’m not saying such exploits don’t exist, but local police departments don’t have access to them. And they certainly don’t have the capability to directly access your device’s storage and then reassemble it without your knowledge.

        Now, if your device is confiscated for long enough that it could be mailed off to a forensics lab for analysis? Sure, then it’s a possibility. But most likely if they want your data that badly they’ll either hold onto your device, compel you into sharing the info with them, or try to trick you into giving it to them. Hanging onto your data without a warrant for over a decade is a high risk, low reward activity.

        Your data’s more vulnerable to this sort of attack in transit.

    • hash0772@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Also, don’t use regular passwords with random letters and numbers, they are really hard to remember and easier to crack if the password isn’t complex enough. Instead, use a passphrase with at least 5 words.

      • StitchIsABitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Is that safe though? After seeing that XKCD I also thought it would be a good idea but then read that using passphrases is even worse because brute force attacks often use dictionaries as well to test word combinations, so one should use scrambled characters, just long enough to resist brute force.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        It calls them “passwords,” but personally I don’t consider a 6 digit number to be a password. And according to this article on GrayKey, 6 digit “passcodes” became the norm back in 2015. I haven’t seen any stats showing that people on average use more secure passcodes now, and making the passcode required more frequently isn’t going to encourage anyone to use one that’s more secure.

        The article just says “disable biometrics” which is bad advice for the average person, as it will result in them using a 6 digit passcode. This is a knee-jerk reaction at best, and the resulting advice is devoid of nuance, made by someone who clearly doesn’t understand the threat discussed in the article, and would benefit literally nobody who might feasibly take it.

        My advice is echoed by the article above, but it’s based off having an understanding of the problem area and suggesting a solution that doesn’t just address one thing. Anyone giving advice on the topic should consider:

        • known threats and reasonably likely unknown threats
        • the mitigations to those threats
        • how the technology works for both the threats and the mitigations
        • the legal landscape in your jurisdiction - for us, the US - both in practice and in theory
        • people’s attitudes toward security, namely their willingness to suffer inconveniences for its sake
        • how all of the above interact, and how likely someone is to take the advice given in a way that improves their security overall

        The author of this article considered none of the above.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I still don’t get where are you seeing this advice in the article. No one is recommending “6 digit passcodes”. AFAIK all contemporary phones use mixed character passwords these days. I just setup a second hand s22 and it asked me to create a full password as primary authentication with all of the brute force strength hints etc.

          Your perception might be a bit outdated here.

          • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            As I said in my first comment, I’m more familiar with iOS, where 6 digit passcodes are the default.

            That said, do you genuinely think the average person would use a random 10+ alphanumeric character passcode to unlock their phone after taking the advice of this article and disabling biometric auth?

            • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yes the contemporary phones literally bug and warn you if you don’t. Password is much easier to remember than 6 digits too imo.

  • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    On pixel, if you ever need to - press and hold the power button, select “lockdown”.

    (It might apply to other androids too, I don’t know.)

    You will now need a pin to unlock the phone. This disables the lock screen shortcut (camera, light, etc) as well.

    Why disable your convence features for an scenerio that is not likely and can be quickly and easily be prevented.

    Universal: You could also just the tap the sensor with a “wrong” finger a few time, and the pin will be required.

    Maybe don’t do this one in front the cops…if you find your self in a postion where they are trying to unlock your phone, you probably don’t want to piss them off. .


    Edit: I’m surprised no one called me out on “if you’re ever need to”. The sentence was going to be “if you’re even in a situation that needs…”, but that was getting too long. Forgot to change you’re to you.

      • gwildors_gill_slits@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I also have a pixel 6 and holding down power also works, though you have to wait a second. Power and volume up is instant.

        • muffedtrims@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          My power button long press only activates Google assistant, it never pops the power menu. Maybe it’s a setting somewhere.

          • gwildors_gill_slits@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Oh, yeah I think you’re right. I think I might’ve changed it at some point.

            Just checked and it’s under system > gestures > press and hold power button

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The Pixel fingerprint scanner is so bad, you could end up locking it entirely by accident.

      Behind-the-screen fingerprint scanners are an abomination.

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Behind-the-screen fingerprint scanners are an abomination.

        Always reminds me of 1984’s telescreens. We’re almost there.

      • Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not my experience. They are usually instant, but you need a flagship device, of course. Otherwise it’s comparing apples and oranges.

        • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The $1000 price tag on the Pixel tells me it’s a flagship device and yet the scanner is still trash.

          But optical scanners just suck in general. I wish they’d bring back the rear sensor, it was so convenient both for unlocking and for having a shortcut to pulling down the notification shade.

      • herrvogel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        First gen in-screen scanners were absolute trash. Borderline unusable. But the tech has improved quite a lot since the first ones. The one in my galaxy tab s9’s screen is fast and accurate.

    • Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s from AOSP, so any device close to the actual Android baseline should support that. This means that you can enter that mode from LineageOS as well.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’ve avoided willingly using biometrics so far. Though I’m sure our faces, gaits, body shapes, etc, are all stored somewhere, willingly or not.

    Say no to biometrics. It’s like having a password you can never change.

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      6 months ago

      So, it really depends on your personal threat model.

      For background: the biometric data doesn’t leave the device, it uses an on-device recognition system to either unlock the device, or to gain access to a hardware security module that uses very strong cryptography for authentication.

      Most people aren’t defending against an attacker who has access to them and their device at the same time, they’re defending against someone who has either the device or neither.

      The hardware security module effectively eliminates the remote attacker when used with either biometric or PIN.
      For the stolen or lost phone attack, biometric is slightly more secure, but it’s moot because of the pin existing for fallback.

      The biggest security advantage the biometrics have to offer is that they’re very hard to forget, and very easy to use.
      Ease of use means more people are likely to adopt the security features using that hardware security module provides, and that’s what’s really dialing up the security.

      Passwords are most people’s biggest vulnerability.

      • Boozilla@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ve read all this before. If you believe the people who designed and implemented the device and its myriad layers of firmware and software were 1. All acting in good faith and 2. Knew WTF they were doing… then: yes, sure.

        Unfortunately that’s way too many strangers for me. Hundreds of people design and code these things. Meanwhile, every week there’s a clever new breach somewhere.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          While I do respect that viewpoint, there’s a lot more independent scrutiny of the hardware modules than there are around the parts that would handle any other authentication mechanism you might use.

          Pixel phone example iPhone example

          Just because something isn’t perfect doesn’t mean we should keep using the less good thing that it replaces.

          Use the PIN if that’s more your cup of tea, just so long as you move away from passwords, since it’s the HSM that’s the protection, not the biometrics. Those are just to make it easier than passwords.

          • Boozilla@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            You can change PINs and passwords, but you cannot change your biometric data.

            It’s about as smart as using your SSN as your username.

            • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              The point being that most people do not need to ever change their biometric data, because it isn’t used for remote authentication.

              It’s about picking the right threat model, and for most people anything that gets them using the HSM is an improvement to their security.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          If you’re that afraid if the people who build phones, why are you ok with using any device that can access the internet?

          • Boozilla@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I like how being cautious with my biometric data is beung framed as irrational fear and paranoia. As if ID theft never happens.

            • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              You should be more worried about your local doctor’s office contracting some cheap-ass company to handle your data and ending up in a branch than being concerned about biometrics.

              Or hell, Experian had that insane breach of basically everyone’s information years ago. Biometrics are not the problem, it’s smaller companies that you have to deal with all the time skimping on security because they think they can’t afford it.

              And then companies even more shady than Google and Apple and Samsung (loan companies, health systems contractors, banks, credit card companies, insurance companies) have all your data and are more likely to be involved in a data breach.

            • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Using biometric data to unlock your phone does not make you more vulnerable to petty criminals.

    • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      7 months ago

      Password you can never change

      Not with that attitude! You can absolutely change your face. its rather inadvisable

    • chrash0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      it’s not a password; it’s closer to a username.

      but realistically it’s not in my personal threat model to be ready to get tied down and forced to unlock my phone. everyone with windows on their house should know that security is mostly about how far an adversary is willing to go to try to steal from you.

      personally, i like the natural daylight, and i’m not paranoid enough to brick up my windows just because it’s a potential ingress.

      • Boozilla@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s not a great analogy. Your house and its windows are exposed to your neighborhood/community. Your internet device is adjacent to every hacker on the web.

        • chrash0@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          it’s an analogy that applies to me. tldr worrying about having my identity stolen via physical access to my phone isn’t part of my threat model. i live in a safe city, and i don’t have anything the police could find to incriminate me. everyone is going to have a different threat model. some people need to brick up their windows

          • Boozilla@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Assuming the phone’s security works as intended, what you’re saying is true. However, it’s a legit concern that the security is not airtight, and physical access is not actually required to harvest your biometric data.

            I know the phone manufacturers make all sorts of claims about how secure biometric data is, but they have a profit motive to do so. I’m not being brick-up-my-windows paranoid by pointing out all the security failures and breaches we’ve seen over the years. Companies that have billions on the line are still frequently falling short at securing their own assets, much less their customer’s data.

            I understand biometrics are convenient, and many folks love the ease / coolness factor of using them. Just don’t kid yourself that it’s secure by requiring your physical phone. Once the dark web has a digital copy of your biometric data, it’s compromised forever.

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Same here. Still using the pattern lock. I’ve never used fingerprint not to even mention face scan.

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    A stipulation of Payne’s parole agreement was that he be willing to provide a passcode to his devices, though that agreement didn’t explicitly refer to biometric data. However, the panel said the evidence from his phone was lawfully acquired “because it required no cognitive exertion, placing it in the same category as a blood draw or a fingerprint taken at booking, and merely provided [police] with access to a source of potential information.”

    These both seem like bad calls. You have a right to privacy, right? And for police to access your files/home/phone tap requires obtaining a warrant.

    Fingerprints at booking gives access to public records. Not your own personal private data. Pretty sure drawing blood is justified suspicion of DUI.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes and no. When you take parole, you agree to give up some freedoms in exchange for getting out of prison early. For example, taking drug tests, checking in with your parole officer, or not leaving the state/country. If your crime was related to using a phone or something, like being a drug dealer, then it can make sense to have to allow your parole officer to check it.

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        6 months ago

        So after you have been convicted of a crime, you will have restrictions based on that crime. That’s a world of difference from pulling over Bob and forcing him to unlock his phone.

  • Juice88@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’ve already planned to spam the lock button for a few seconds if something like that came up (iPhone) it triggers the emergency settings and disabled unlock without a passcode.

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      You can also just hold a volume button + power. That will bring up the power / emergency screen and will require a non biometric password for the next unlock.

  • Grntrenchman@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    For Android: learn the hard reset combo for your phone, especially if you encrypt it.

    After rebooting, pattern/PIN will be required to decrypt the phone. Biometrics won’t work for this step. This is what graphene does for security, tries to keep the phone in a “before first unlock” state by rebooting on a timer. You can’t even read anything over USB/ADB, it’s scrambled until you unlock the phone.

    The only drawback to just keeping your phone in this state is none of your apps are loaded, so no notifications/updates/processing at all.

      • atrielienz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        You don’t even need to do that. You can go to the power down menu on Android 14 and select lockdown. Even from the lock screen without unlocking the phone.