this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2026
274 points (99.3% liked)

Privacy

50103 readers
684 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 100 points 6 days ago (5 children)

Name one thing that can't land you in prison in the US. I'll wait.

[–] AmyAye@nord.pub 98 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Indirectly murdering hundreds of thousands of people in pursuit of profits.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 6 days ago

With the caveat that, if you don't achieve those profits, it will land you in jail.

[–] msage@programming.dev 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

And manslaughter with a car.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

Got me there

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 67 points 6 days ago (2 children)

pedophilia (if you are rich)

[–] DragonOracleIX@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago

You don't even need that first part. Being rich makes it 10x harder for you to be prosecuted.

[–] WitchKnight@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 6 days ago

For profit slave labor prisons are very lucrative I hear

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

Being white

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tlekiteki@lemmy.dbzer0.com 88 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Supreme court has ruled that warrantless phone search at the border is bogus, but theyre too shitpantsed to stick with it

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 19 points 6 days ago

they are evil and hypocritical is what they are.

they want to make an example out of people trying to escape the panopticon.

[–] SunDevil@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 days ago

Not if you live within the jurisdiction of the 4th Circuit. The court "ruled that a lower standard applies to manual searches, allowing the government to conduct extraordinarily invasive electronic device searches without any suspicion of wrongdoing, simply because the border officer chooses to search by hand rather than with a forensic tool."

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/07/fourth-circuit-says-border-agents-can-search-your-phone-hand-no-suspicion-required

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sir_Gkar@lemmy.world 49 points 6 days ago (9 children)

Seems like what's needed is the ability to load an alternate profile or some kind of demo mode based on the pin. Something that looks normal but doesn't have any info you don't want others to see, without actually deleting anything.

[–] steelplatedmech@piefed.ca 35 points 6 days ago

Or loads a dummy profile and deletes other profiles without giving away what is happening.

[–] Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I had this feature on a Xiaomi phone that i had a few years ago. I could even set up the fingerprint reader to open a different profile depending on which finger i used.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GMac@feddit.org 8 points 5 days ago

Dont think that would be as secure. Once a phone has been unlocked after reboot, even if it has been locked again, the operating system and ram can be accessed quite easily with the correct tools and border controls have those tools.

Even a Graphene phone is only properly secure before first unlock after reboot. So i would not personally rely on allowing acess to any profile. I would assume its possible, (probably trivial) to gain complete access from there.

Any duress pin use should be covered under a person's right to avoid self incrimination.

If the phone is owned by your employer and they are the investigation target, then you might be on dodgy ground.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] shadowtofu@discuss.tchncs.de 37 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (4 children)

You have to carry a piece of paper in your wallet that contains a PIN. The piece of paper contains no further information, just a PIN. You decline to answer any questions regarding this piece of paper or your phone’s PIN.

This might not be a good idea, depending on your jurisdiction.

[–] utjebe@reddthat.com 9 points 5 days ago

Or just set it to your mmddyy or something typical for weak passwords

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SupremeDonut@lemmy.ml 16 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If the phone's security prevents them from accessing information, then they have no information. How can they prove there was any information on it to begin with?

[–] JamesBoeing737MAX@sopuli.xyz 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They just accuse you of withholding evidence. Yay for freedom of speech.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (4 children)

@SupremeDonut@lemmy.ml the courts already decided that it was okay to jail people for literal years for not providing a password: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Rawls

and there are more:

  • United States v. Fricosu
  • United States v. Doe (2012)
  • United States v. Kirschner
[–] SupremeDonut@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Jfc. Next you'll be jailed for not having a phone

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago (2 children)
[–] DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I assume all PC users are also on watchlists because they can run Linux or BSD too? Even if they haven't erased Windows yet?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 34 points 6 days ago (1 children)

this is what peak democracy™ looks like, dont be fooled

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 20 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

And that person is the officer that destroyed the evidence

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone 22 points 6 days ago (5 children)

This is yesterday's news. Destroying evidence is a crime in a lot of jurisdictions. With that in mind, I don't understand how somebody who apparently uses Graphene OS didn't bring an empty burner when crossing one of the most notorious borders in the world.

Which isn't to say that the laws that require you to unlock your phone and that throw you in jail if you securely wipe it aren't hostile and inhumane.

[–] Aequitas@feddit.org 59 points 6 days ago (7 children)

How are they supposed to know there was evidence on it? I'm allowed to delete my files, aren't I?

[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 25 points 6 days ago

Be careful not to swallow your spit. They may think you're swallowing a bomb and shoot you on the spot.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 46 points 6 days ago

Except that this person wasn't accused or even suspected of a crime.

[–] OccasionallyFeralya@lemmy.ml 25 points 6 days ago (3 children)

If I understand correctly they didn’t actually delete anything it just shreds the encryption keys so it can’t be accessed. Idk if the difference matters a whole lot though.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 6 days ago

No it wipes the data from the phone

GrapheneOS provides users with the ability to set a duress PIN/Password that will irreversibly wipe the device (along with any installed eSIMs) once entered anywhere where the device credentials are requested

source

[–] akunohana@piefed.blahaj.zone 13 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Very interesting! I'd like to ask a lawyer how they think the courts would view that. The data is intact, just not decryptable. 🤣

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] madasi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 days ago

That is a distinction without a difference. Either way the once accessible data can no longer be accessed any longer.

[–] GMac@feddit.org 12 points 5 days ago

In order to be convicted of destroying evidence, there needs to be proof that there was "evidence" on the phone in the first place.

If something on the phone is already known without doubt, then what's the need for access? if there is doubt at the time of the wipe then there is no proof or destroying evidence. 🤷‍♂️

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hamid@crazypeople.online 14 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Funny how the lemmy liberals never believe that the US is the authoritarian country lol

[–] stochasticity@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Really? I feel like I'm constantly seeing complaints about the US's growing authoritarianism.

[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They didnt grow to it. Nobody just gave a shit before, because it wasnt against all skin colors.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 7 points 5 days ago (6 children)

It's not even about skin color, not really. It's about poverty and people not having a chance to get out of it. I would also commit crimes if I felt my life had no future.

[–] pelican476@discuss.online 4 points 5 days ago

I think this is misguided and a bit too optimistic. Racist cops don't become racist because of their lived experiences, they're already racist when they take the job.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›