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

Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 190 posts

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#41

Post by rcthompson »

On Android, if you have fingerprint unlock enabled, you still have to enter a PIN it other unlock code after a reboot (I can't speak for carrier-specific modifications, though). So if you have time, shutting down your phone (or leaving it turned off even not using it) would prevent your fingerprint from unlocking it. I believe the same is true for an iPhone as well.

More generally, if this is important to you, make sure you know under what circumstances your phone will or will not consider a fingerprint sufficient. Also, you should check whether the error message betrays any information. If you try a fingerprint when it requires a PIN code, does it say the same thing for a known and an unknown fingerprint?

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#43

Post by ljf »

candiodari wrote: post #34
yardie wrote: post #10

This is why my unlock is not tied to biometrics. Once I realized the government can compel you to unlock your phone without a warrant using your fingerprint it became a much less compelling feature. The same for facial recognition.

Do you travel ? In much if not all of Europe not giving your password, even to a random search when passing through (not entering the country), is a crime. Therefore legal advice is to provide custom agents and other police with access to any device upon request and then.

Really? Never heard of that in the UK or when travelling in Europe, but I could be wrong. Do you have any links to more information on this?

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#44

Post by mirimir »

candiodari wrote: post #34
yardie wrote: post #10

This is why my unlock is not tied to biometrics. Once I realized the government can compel you to unlock your phone without a warrant using your fingerprint it became a much less compelling feature. The same for facial recognition.

Do you travel ? In much if not all of Europe not giving your password, even to a random search when passing through (not entering the country), is a crime. Therefore legal advice is to provide custom agents and other police with access to any device upon request and then.

Right. So just don't keep anything sensitive on the phone. Whenever crossing borders or otherwise subject to search and seizure, carry blank devices. Access sensitive stuff from secure online repositories.

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#45

Post by eternalban »

gonzo wrote: post #38
eternalban wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has to be speech, since speech is protected. How about 'phrase of the day' to be spoken in conjunction with swipe? [p.s. this should be relatively trivial to roll out in a patch by Apple.]

Political speech is protected. There may be 4th and 5th amendment arguments, too

Miranda: Right to remain silent.

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#46

Post by crooked-v »

jlgaddis wrote: post #20
crooked-v wrote: post #12

I have to wonder what sort of technical measures could be implemented to make biometric systems as legally secure as passwords while still retaining something like the same convenience. The first thing that comes to mind for me is the Apple patent on recognizing a fingerprint anywhere on the phone's surface, and using that in combination with Android-style lock screen patterns. A lock screen pattern isn't nearly as s…

The linked article states that a "voice print" would likely be sufficient (but hasn't been tested legally).

I skipped over voice as a possibility because of the "look like a doofus in public" factor.

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#47

Post by M_Grey »

susan_hall wrote: post #33
M_Grey wrote: post #2

Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…

I'm not sure if "overwhelmingly mindless" is the right characterization. In my opinion, the most interesting story playing out among the Western nations is what is happening in Poland right now. In the USA, people fought for independence from Britain starting in 1775, so obviously those people are not alive in 2016. But in Poland, many of the people alive now are the same people who overthrew tyranny in 1989. That's…

If a voter's reaction to anger with a failed system is to shoot themselves in the foot with a pistol they've had laying around since '89, I'm going to stick with the "mindless" appellation.

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#48

Post by M_Grey »

lisper wrote: post #37
M_Grey wrote: post #2

Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…

No, it's what happens when large numbers of people decide they care about safety and security more than they care about freedom. That doesn't necessarily make it any better, but to attribute this outcome to mindlessness is to badly miss the point. The first step to solving a problem is to understand what the problem actually is .

The problem is that we're not exchanging freedom for security, we're exchanging freedom for the empty promise of security and the reality of a police state.

I'm still calling "mindless".

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#49

Post by ZoeZoeBee »

lisper wrote: post #37
M_Grey wrote: post #2

Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…

No, it's what happens when large numbers of people decide they care about safety and security more than they care about freedom. That doesn't necessarily make it any better, but to attribute this outcome to mindlessness is to badly miss the point. The first step to solving a problem is to understand what the problem actually is .

? Who are the large numbers of people you speak of, who decided perceived "safety and security" are more desirable than freedom? Far as I can tell the general public had no say in the legislation, and the legislatures who pushed through the Patriot Act reassured their constituents that the abuses we're witnessing were not under the realm of possibility. Meanwhile the Feds techniques of warrant-less intervention and forced entry of suspects phone have yet to yield measurable results.

The general public is mindless to the extent of surveillance and the aggregation of that data, the vast majority are certainly unaware of the possible unintended consequences of wanton disregard for the 3rd, 4th and 5th amendments. Only a third of Americans can even name all three branches of government, to believe they're informed on matters they don't understand on a technical or philosophical level is badly overestimating the American Public.

Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones

#50

Post by sliverstorm »

basch wrote: post #9
eternalban wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading this from the Forbes article: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3143273/Mass-Fing... Relevant bits start at page 5 (III - LEGAL DISCUSSION). Compelling a person to provide his or her fingerprint does not implicate, let alone violate, the Fifth Amendment. "[B]oth federal and state courts have usually held that [the Fifth Amendment] offers no protection against compulsion to submit to fingerprinting."…

yet this law was made for identification purposes, not unlocking safes.

Right, and considering fingerprint's long history as identification, it seems like it would be both impossible & unreasonable to try to split the two uses. Can we really say "You only obtained his fingerprint for the purpose of identifying him, you can't use it to unlock the phone"? And, we can't reasonably try to end the use of fingerprints as ID...
Post reply on HN