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.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
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.
This is fucking stupid. If I delete something on my phone while I'm on vacation am I going to prison because the border patrol might have wanted to look at it?
Should have been born a child fucking billionaire if you don’t want to be sentenced to prison for 30 years.
What color are you and how far left are your politics?
It’s bullshit but with the current laws. Back up your phone before you head home wipe it before going through border control, and restore your backup when you get home.
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.
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.
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.
The indictment alleges that Tunick knowingly deleted the phone’s digital contents
My hot take: the officer wiped the phone. With their own hands. They're just stupid.
Hotter take: The phone was empty when he handed it over. There was nothing to delete.
If they succeed I guess in the future an officer could delete your phone to save face then blame it on you.
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.
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!
GrapheneOS should update the duress passcode to load a dummy profile like Only Key’s Plausible Deniability Feature.
What a shithole
Prosecuted for what, exactly? If push comes to shove, it's a fifth amendment issue.
I haven't searched yet, but I'm curious if this is the first time that someone's being prosecuted for this. Authorities can detain a US Citizen and confiscate their electronic devices for forensic analysis, which should be a violations of the 5th, but the SCotUS feels differently.
If this is the first time a US Citizen has been prosecuted for refusing to unlock and handover their personal devices, then I'd wager that the authorities want to make this into a test case, and appeal it all the way to the SCotUS to rule that such a seizure and prosecution is not unconstitutional, or required for national security, or some other authoritarian bull.
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.
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.
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.