- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
Guys don’t travel to fascist countries.
So only girls go to fascist countries?
Idr if this was a feature that made it into a real OS or just a concept that never came to be, but…
I recall reading about a duress pin that instead of deleting stuff, just booted up normally… but to basically a separate user profile. From the non-duress profile you could choose features that would be shared between the two, like texts or call history of specific people, browser history, photo albums, etc.
So “sure officer, it’s 5224” would open up a phone profile that looks convincingly used, with nice long trails of cat memes and chatter with your gaming buddies about your favorite franchise enshittifying, and so on.
Punch in your real pin to unlock it though, and it’s got full access to everything, including data you want to keep private.
…and, uh, if any of you are designing a mobile OS right now, here’s your feature suggestion!
So basically veracrypt hidden volumes
Prosecuted for what, exactly? If push comes to shove, it’s a fifth amendment issue.
I didn’t know android could do that. I wanna turn one on! But, I can’t find it. I’ve looked under Security and Privacy. I have a pattern to get in (they can physically force you to unlock your phone with fingerprints), no facial recognition, and my security and privacy is all green checkmarks. I’ve tried to find it under my Samsung account’s security stuff. Its not there. It doesn’t even show up when I search for it on the settings search bar. What am I missing?
I use Android 16 and have OneUI 8.5.
This is a GrapheneOS feature.
Oh, so its a different operating system or something?
Yes, it’s a different Android based OS. It’s privacy focused, hence having this feature, and only supports Google Pixel devices.
Android is just a version of Linux, so anyone can make a fork of it. Most Android device manufacturers do this, including your device having Samsung’s rendition of Android and my OnePlus having OxygenOS (soon to be ColorOS), but anyone can do the same if they’d like. LineageOS is another super cool Android project.
The charge treats the alleged wipe as destruction of property intended to prevent a government seizure.
He is being charged with destroying “evidence” but he was never charged with anything in the first place. That is like saying deleting any files at home is a crime. I’d think forcing you to present evidence necessary to charge you with something would fall under the constitutional right against self-incrimination.
Like resisting arrest when there’s no legal reason you were being detained or arrested?
I’m half-expecting for it to turn out that he was being wholly compliant, and he’s being accused of destruction of evidence because they were looking for something that never existed to begin with.
Write the duress PIN on a piece of paper in your wallet. Someone searching your phone is probably also searching your wallet and may try the PIN.
Genius. Flips the script. In the process of conducting an illegal search, you deleted my phone causing considerable financial and emotional damage. Lawsuit time.
Legally this might be the same as intentionally deleting evidence. Rigging up evidence to be destroyed could be considered as intent of evidence misconduct, and some judges might not consider there to be a semantic difference given the intended end result to be the same (IANAL but the US judges are crazy)
It probably won’t work, at least (US)domestically. The requirement for obtaining a warrant before searching a phone is part of training because there is a clear Supreme Court ruling to that effect.
That being said, what the law says and what some random asshole does during a stop are not always the same thing.
This was a point of entry. No search warrant required.
Their way around it is they say that the border crossing technically isn’t 100% normal US territory and therefore some constitutional rights are suspended under the concept of “sovereign self-protection”. You could then say any law in the US could be used to justify this concept, in fact it was used to forcibly intern thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans during ww2.
He was targeted for purely political reasons, the cop-city environmental protest in Atlanta GA, and I’m wondering why the border officials were even aware of them. Is there some sort of “we don’t like what you think” list run by the gov?
His device was threatened with seizure even though he posed no threat, no visible threat or spoken one, no suspicion of a crime, and they had no idea what the contents were. His 5th Amendment rights were violated by the threat to seize it. They want to establish a precedent, that the very existence of a possibility of criminal contents, regardless of any reason to suspect any, is sufficient for search and seizure. Based on this a little kid deleting the contents of their ipad would be a crime.
Is there some sort of “we don’t like what you think” list run by the gov?
i’ve been on it, yes.
Is there some sort of “we don’t like what you think” list run by the gov?
You think all these data centers are just for making bad code and creepy videos?
Feds following the law? Did you miss the last decade?
That being said, what the law says and what some random asshole does during a stop are not always the same thing.
- get a phone with a removable battery and wireless charging
- break the USB port
- pull out the battery before crossing the border
sorry, my phone is dead and won’t hold a charge.
- nothing untrue about that statement
- state of the phone was a preexisting condition and cannot be used to apply obstruction charges
I mean, sure, but then they seize the phone and still get all the data. In this case he wiped the data so it couldn’t be seized.
If the duress pin makes obvious it’s the duress pin then it’s not really doing its job. It should instead open a profile with not much in it while erasing the other profile and files in the background.
They asked to unlock his phone, he entered the wipe instead personal pin, and the wipe starts, with no possible reversal.
I mean yeah they discover it when he hands them the phone and it shows something other than an unlocked screen… But he is still in detention? Making a fake homescreen will fool them for like 30 secs tops until they open literally any app and sees it’s either completely empty or that it doesn’t work.
What would that solve? It just drags out the procedure
The purpose of a duress code is plausible deniability.
There is an encryption product for Windows called VeraCrypt (aka TrueCrypt). You can create a hidden decoy volume inside an outer encrypted volume which has all your stuff in it. When mounted an observer cannot tell the difference between the hidden volume and the real volume since they are mounted the same way with different passcodes. You can put files in the decoy for plausibility but not the things you actually want to hide.
The same should be true of a duress code in a phone. It should be possible to put files, apps and stuff in the decoy that show activity e.g. email, pictures etc. Providing the other profile is wiped while this screen is showing then there is no immediate way of proving it was a duress code.
It would have to at least convince the border guard, but it should withstand forensic analysis too. So it might be necessary to do what VeraCrypt does.
Empty apps or no apps aren’t necessarily a sign of guilt, but they will look at you like you are because its not normal.
Companies often have travel laptops which are a clean install and no private corporate info exposed.
From reading up on the laws and if what this article says is true, even if they unlocked his phone and found evidence of crimes on it, gods case would be kicked to the curb as it was all an illegal search and correct procedures weren’t followed.
ngl, in his position I would have wiped it too. Not because I had anything illegal, but because I have a signal chat with the bros where we sometimes bitch about politics and I don’t need this administration’s FBI arresting me as a terrorist for stupid memes about socialism and queer jokes.
Border guards do not need a search warrant to search you and your property at a crossing or point of entry. The search was perfectly legal.
“At a crossing” means with 100 miles of any border or port of entry. Which is about 67% of the country. It is complete bullshit of a policy.
I’m not an expert, but I don’t believe that applies to airport points of entry. Regardless, if you’re going to something as suspicious as wiping your phone while at a point of entry, consulting a lawyer beforehand is just a reasonable thing to do.
You may think some laws are bullshit, (ie: sovereign citizens) but you are still governed by those laws.
All I am saying is be informed.
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to reasonable articulable facts of observation that lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
The 100 miles extends inward from the exterior border, not around every airport. But every international airport is a port of entry over which they have jurisdiction and can perform warrantless searches. And, in my opinion, warrantless searches for everyone by virtue of simply entering into the country is a violation of the 4th amendment. Which is why it’s bullshit and shouldn’t be allowed. It can and often is abused, especially when tied to another equally (should be) unconstitutional “law”, civil forfeiture, even before the bullshit policies Trump and the SCOTUS have deemed reasonable suspicion for illegal status (i.e. appearing Hispanic, speaking Spanish, displaying a flag from another nation, etc.) I’m aware of the laws, but that doesn’t make them just or even constitutional.
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
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. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
deleted by creator
Of course they just deny you entry at that point…
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
You are sorely misinformed on both counts…
The headline is wrong.
Fascist regime fucks over people’s constitutional rights and could send a man to prison for protecting his own privacy.
There, fixed.
My understanding is you can’t actually be forced (legally) to give up your phone’s PIN or password as part of a police search, because it violates the 5th amendment against self-incrimination, even at the border. Now will they still find a way to fuck up your day if you refuse to unlock your phone, sure, but I feel like saying “I have a right under the 5th Amendment to not reveal my password” is going to be a lot easier to defend than “I intentionally wiped/locked/bricked my phone when you asked to look through it.”
Depends
Most phones can be accessed by forensic software. The more secure phones are protected as long as they’ve just been restarted but before they’re unlocked for the first time.
Some phones, like an up-to-date GrapheneOS on a supported Pixel, may resist forensic imaging after first unlocking but the information is in memory so there could potentially be zero days or other exotic methods of obtaining the data.
A duress wipe lets you know 100% that the data is not accessible.
Without a warrant, it’s literally his phone to do with it what he pleases. Baffled that that’s not the end of the conversation.
Assuming we lived in a rational world with a fair and impartial justice system, and not one that exists to funnel money from the working class into the Epstein class and kill or imprison everyone that makes that less easy.
Another day closer to Chiron.
Oh, because they are outside US borders they claim not to need a warrant, but that doesn’t stop them using US law to prosecute him though.
well they have the “border search exception” so at the border, no, they generally do not need a warrant for “routine searches” of electronic devices. Fucked up, but that is the law on the books and US courts have virtually always upheld it when it comes up.
https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-search-electronic-devices
You’ll be surprised by what you don’t know.
I think the supreme court has said they can search phones without warrants at the border and points of entry, so airports.
You can’t be compelled to give them your password, but you can be compelled to use your biometric ID. Clear as mud.
Assuming we lived in a rational world with a fair and impartial justice system
That’s like assuming unicorns will protect all that is good and sugar is effective weight loss
Well yeah. Hence the second half of that sentence.
What’s a warrant?
A judge issues a warrant when there is an active criminal investigation. If there’s no investigation, no warrant.
Oh, that’s not how it works in the united States. Is this some commonwealth legal thing?
It is how it works inside the united states. It’s just they claim that because he was on the flight side of the airport, he wasn’t inside the US.
it is how it works
Thanks but I live here and it’s not basically ever.
Cops either use a pretense tools like a drug dog to establish probable cause for the search they want or do parallel construction after they’ve already built the general structure of a case, usually tracing things to a valid cause for search, usually via coached informant.
Or its ice and they can just do whatever they want.
You’re living in a fantasy world and your delusional ignorance is real danger is worrying. Please never approach or speak to me in person.
Did you stop reading at that point?
That’s not how it works. I’m not sure that’s how it’s ever worked. You’re living in a fantasy. Warrants are not a meaningfully real thing.
Back up and wipe your phone before you cross the border. That way if they want to look at it, feel free to hand it to them. When you get back home, restore the backup.
Also consider getting a throwaway phone if they try to keep it.
What law did he break? Vs the warrantless search that is breaking the law. If only the supreme court didn’t give them a pass.
Search without a warrant is valid at the border.
Not without probable cause or your consent it’s not.
So I’ve learned :(
Or within 100 miles of it. Including all international airports. That just soh appens to be like 80% of the population or something.
It does not include airports. People need to stop repeating that
