Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 215 posts

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#181

Post by cstejerean »

basch wrote: post #161
ubernostrum wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't think of Touch ID as unlocking the phone. You know how you can "sudo" and type your password (if you have an account with sudo privileges) and then for a few minutes afterward you don't have to type your password when you use sudo? Think of Touch ID like that: the passcode is still the thing that unlocks the phone, but once it's been entered you can use Touch ID for a little while, in much the same way that sud…

that is what i am asking, where is the 48 hour part. ive never left my phone untouched for 48 hours, except in a powered off state.

You don't have to leave the phone untouched for 48 hours. Even if you touch it you still need the passcode every 48 hours. TouchID only works for 48 hours past the last passcode login.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#182

Post by tedd4u »

basch wrote: post #161
ubernostrum wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't think of Touch ID as unlocking the phone. You know how you can "sudo" and type your password (if you have an account with sudo privileges) and then for a few minutes afterward you don't have to type your password when you use sudo? Think of Touch ID like that: the passcode is still the thing that unlocks the phone, but once it's been entered you can use Touch ID for a little while, in much the same way that sud…

that is what i am asking, where is the 48 hour part. ive never left my phone untouched for 48 hours, except in a powered off state.

basch what happens is, at a minimum, the iPhone requires your PIN or passcode every 48 hours to unlock. In between, you can use your finger as many times as you want. So the 48 hour timer should fire as soon as immediately after someone gets posession of your phone, but no more than 48 hours afterward.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#183

Post by xkcd-sucks »

chris_wot wrote: post #124
khedoros wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contempt is only supposed to be for when someone's action brings the mechanism of a trial to a halt. Refusing to do an action that the court thinks it's allowed to compel you to do is an example. Say she waits two days. The phone won't be unlocked with a fingerprint now; it requires a passcode, and the court can't compel someone to provide a passcode in the same way that it can compel them to provide fingerprints. Co…

Probably a ridiculous thought experiment, but I know folks have done similar things before, what if she cut off her thumb and disposed of it in such a way that it was irretrievable? Or something less permanent like dipping her thumb in acid to destroy the fingerprint surface - which would take weeks to heal. Would would the court do then? It sounds to me like fingerprint authentication is not something a criminal sho…

>what if she cut off her thumb and disposed of it in such a way that it was irretrievable? Or something less permanent like dipping her thumb in acid to destroy the fingerprint surface

Sounds like intent to harm oneself, which gets one locked up in the loony bin until one demonstrates oneself to be of sound mind.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#184

Post by harryh »

united893 wrote: post #50

If you have five minutes, please see this short video from CGPGrey, which summarizes succinctly why access to your phone is akin to access to brain: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPBH1eW28mo

I don't think it makes that point well at all. It says that (kinda) but doesn't support the idea with any form of reasoning. In fact, it's a relatively minor point and not really the main point of the video at all.

If you had access to my phone you could learn a great many things about me (most of them banal) but there are many many many thoughts in my head that don't exist on my phone in any form.

Continued nerd insistence of your point is little more than fetishization of technology. There's a reason Obama used that word at sxsw. It connotes a level of obsession and overfocus that is, quite frankly, pretty creepy.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#185

Post by chris_wot »

mywittyname wrote: post #157
chris_wot wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably a ridiculous thought experiment, but I know folks have done similar things before, what if she cut off her thumb and disposed of it in such a way that it was irretrievable? Or something less permanent like dipping her thumb in acid to destroy the fingerprint surface - which would take weeks to heal. Would would the court do then? It sounds to me like fingerprint authentication is not something a criminal sho…

Sounds like obstruction of justice.

As often happens, I've heard of this term but had to look it up. I think you are right, that is obstructing justice.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#186

Post by harryh »

spdustin wrote: post #140

For me, the ongoing question that needs to be addressed by the court is this: Is the content of your smartphone considered to be documentary evidence (something you have) or testimony (something you know). I know I'm mixing definitions of the something you have/know combination, but it's a difference without a distinction, IMHO. I tell my phone, either directly or indirectly, all sorts of things that I would not othe…

I don't think you understand the legal justification behind the 5th amendment. It has nothing to do with the contents of your mind being private. It is a protection against forced confessions via torture.

A long time ago it used to be common to torture people until the admitted to committing a crime that they did not commit just to stop getting tortured. By making this sort of testimony inadmissible it removes the incentive to torture.

The various restrictions against law enforcement whether it be the 5th amendment or anything else all exist for specific reasons. They aren't just there to make law enforcement's job harder and as a general privacy protections. Extending these rules beyond the justification for their existence (as you attempt to do in your comment) isn't supported by legal precedent.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#187

Post by chris_wot »

xkcd-sucks wrote: post #183
chris_wot wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably a ridiculous thought experiment, but I know folks have done similar things before, what if she cut off her thumb and disposed of it in such a way that it was irretrievable? Or something less permanent like dipping her thumb in acid to destroy the fingerprint surface - which would take weeks to heal. Would would the court do then? It sounds to me like fingerprint authentication is not something a criminal sho…

>what if she cut off her thumb and disposed of it in such a way that it was irretrievable? Or something less permanent like dipping her thumb in acid to destroy the fingerprint surface Sounds like intent to harm oneself, which gets one locked up in the loony bin until one demonstrates oneself to be of sound mind.

Not necessarily, thank goodness!

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#188

Post by huxley »

cstejerean wrote: post #181
basch wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is what i am asking, where is the 48 hour part. ive never left my phone untouched for 48 hours, except in a powered off state.

You don't have to leave the phone untouched for 48 hours. Even if you touch it you still need the passcode every 48 hours. TouchID only works for 48 hours past the last passcode login.

Not quite, the passcode is needed 48 hours past the last unlock but the clock restarts with every login or unlock including TouchID unlocks.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#189

Post by EGreg »

kingkawn wrote: post #88
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contempt is a weird power in general, especially when it's used for reasons like "disrespecting the judge." If I am disrespectful to the governor of my state, or if I'm disrespectful to a police officer, or if I'm disrespectful to a fireman or a bailiff or a legislator or a district attorney or a teacher or the President, that is a thing that I can legally do. But for some reason it's not outrageous for a judge to se…

How else can the court enforce that it is the final decision on disputes other than this? It is unfair, but seems like the logical place for unfairness to reside in such a system.

Can a court order contempt just because they don't like your answers?

Can a court hold the jury in contempt for having the wrong verdict? They used to be able to.

Re: Judge Grants Search Warrant Forcing Woman to Unlock iPhone with Touch ID

#190

Post by niij »

stcredzero wrote: post #109
JoshTriplett wrote: post #2

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. I thought that fingerprints were to be provided to: 1) establish biometric proof of identity 2) establish the presence of a person in a particular place 3) establish a person handled a particular object Or does the law establish that the authorities…

I'm not sure where you're getting this list from. But, I think that #3 would be relevant in this case, as the person would have needed to handle the device to register their fingerprint.
Post reply on HN