News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
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.
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
My old apple finger print scanner worked on my elbow wrinkles
Yep, that'll slow them down as they make you use the other fingers until one works.
Gotta use the knuckle of your pinkie
Toe unlock for the win
That's 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.
Except of course that getting lifesentences for simply being an anti-fascist is now the tradition in the US.
There are some of us that know these things happen and take steps to protect our rights and personal data.
Most all of us here have multiple methods employed to avoid being tracked online via browser plugins or whatever. Some of us take it a step further and lock our phones should an encounter with LEOs be a possibility, and he had a wipe command to go even further.
These days the US is closer to a lot of fascist authoritarian states, and it’s probably only a short time before they throw people in jail for whatever manufactured reason because they wipe a phone before the Gestapo can pry into it and charge us with the crime of being un-American or some shit because we posted a meme mocking trump.
If you really want to pass through customs without issues, you need to do what most companies do through their IT. use a burner phone or laptop. Of course you may get a bit of scrutiny, make sure you take heaps of holiday snaps and send messages and such before you leave so theres something for the fart tube pigs to look through.
While valid, I think people have a hard enough time affording the phone they have now. Adding an additional line or better yet separate account and international data access might be too much. I think for most people turning their phone completely off with biometrics disabled and a decent lock password is about the best we could expect.
Doesn't matter what his reasons were to wipe the device, that's the point of privacy, not to hide criminal activities.
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.
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
I did that, and it tried to call 911
I wish I read more of this thread first. In GrapheneOS it first opened my camera app and then attempted calling 911. Freaked me out so much cause I was relaxing in bed with my titties out. Also the setting is called Emergency SOS if you want to disable it.
For some android phones it's a setting. I have long press with an option for Lockdown and 5 click duress
Not sure what the difference is between my adroid locking when I just tap the power button one ane when I enter lockdown mode after holding the power button. They both get to tge same needing to put in a pattern to unlock.
For me its power + volume up
Android varies a bit depending on the software/manufacturer. It was added in Android 9 but some software releases remove it.
By default it is not enabled. You can search settings for "Lockdown", and then it will just be an option in the menu when you hold the power button.
Looks like it's now a permanent item in the power menu. (I just got upgraded to Android 17 and couldn't find it in settings, but it is on my power/reboot menu options already.) Thanks for the tip, I didn't even realize Android had this.
The thing with android lockdown is that it turns back off as soon as you unlock it. For something like going to an airport, I would go into settings and disable "use biometrics to unlock" under the biometric settings. Lockdown is more of an "oh shit" button, if you have the time to do it properly make it stick until you're safe.
Better to just turn the phone off if you're in the power menu anyway. On boot up the phone requires a non-biometric credential to decrypt it.
The police has access to computer software that can crack 8 digit smarphone pins in minutes.
Not every police department, and not every phone, of course. But the software exists. Refuse to unlock your phone and they just take it from you and crack it open anyway.
I’m not saying this to tell you to just comply. I’m telling you this to let you know that refusing to unlock your phone does largely nothing.
It takes more than minutes, especially with an OS that doesn't have a back door built into it. Also that's a forensic tool, IIRC those require a warrant to use.
I know, what about a fake password that wipes the phone?
We have come full circle.
They'd need a warrant signed by a judge to crack your passcode or everything would be inadmissible and any half-assed lawyer could win you a civil rights settlement.
Not at customs. Courts have consistently held warrantless searches are a-ok before you are officially admitted entry to the country.