51–60 of 215 posts
Curious, what would happen if you purposefully damage your fingerprint? Say by forcing a burn on your finger using a stove top or car cigarette lighter.
The answer to your question though is that, at least on the phone's side, it would require your passcode to login
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a problem for me. Charge and prosecute them or let them go. Indefinite detention without a fair and speedy trial is unquestionably unconstitutional.
Well imagine a criminal is holding a piece of your property or even a person and not revealing where that is. Do you think it's reasonable to hold them for 30 days and then let them go and say "ah well I guess you can return that/them if you want cuz you did your time." A charge of contempt is still a charge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a problem for me. Charge and prosecute them or let them go. Indefinite detention without a fair and speedy trial is unquestionably unconstitutional.
Well imagine a criminal is holding a piece of your property or even a person and not revealing where that is. Do you think it's reasonable to hold them for 30 days and then let them go and say "ah well I guess you can return that/them if you want cuz you did your time." A charge of contempt is still a charge.
You have the right to not divulge information from your mind that would incriminate yourself. In the US this is called the 5th amendment.
You can be compelled to provide fingerprints based on a warrant; I'm unsurprised (and not particularly bothered) that you can be compelled to use them on your own device. If you care about security, don't use a fingerprint alone; at most, only use it as a second factor for two-factor authentication. More generally, don't use anything that removes your ability to make a choice under duress, in whichever direction you…
> You can be compelled to provide fingerprints based on a warrant; I'm unsurprised (and not particularly bothered) that you can be compelled to use them on your own device. 5th amendment.
http://pilotonline.com/news/local/crime/police-can-require-c...
5th amendment appears to be restricted to what you know based on all available rulings thus far. A password would fall under "what you know."
5th amendment: "No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." How does this not apply here?
Needs to support a duress finger.
Wouldn't using the duress finger result in some sort of destruction of evidence charge?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The person who is being held indefinitely for not giving up his password is really frightening. They should either let him go or charge him with contempt of course/obstruction and issue time served! Even if you /know/ you don't have anything illegal on any of my encrypted devices, it's better to take a contempt of court charge than give up a password...because of what they might /find/ or possible things unrelated to…
Contempt is a terrifying charge, because under current law, you can be jailed indefinitely for the same contempt charge for as long as you refuse to cooperate with whatever the court thinks you should cooperate with. There's no upper bound there. So that wouldn't solve the problem.
You can be compelled to provide fingerprints based on a warrant; I'm unsurprised (and not particularly bothered) that you can be compelled to use them on your own device. If you care about security, don't use a fingerprint alone; at most, only use it as a second factor for two-factor authentication. More generally, don't use anything that removes your ability to make a choice under duress, in whichever direction you…
In the era of fast 3d printers, what stands in the way of just fashioning a suitable fake finger from the fingerprint?