Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
1–10 of 294 posts
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#2I won't believe this ruling is safe until it goes thru higher levels. The Executive Branch has over the past 2 decades has shown a large propensity for attempts to disregard the 4th and 5th amendments, and I see no change in this posture or the attempts to subvert them with the current political climate.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#3Relevant excerpt:
> “The undersigned finds that a biometric feature is analogous to the 20 nonverbal, physiological responses elicited during a polygraph test, which are used to determine guilt or innocence, and are considered testimonial.”
So it's analogous to a passcode because you're divulging something stored by your body, as opposed to e.g. a metal key which is artificial.
Tangentially related, it's astounding to me that polygraphs are still considered valid evidence given how widely they've been discredited.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#4But can they seize your phone and crack it and look through your stuff without your permission or getting a warrant/judicial oversight?
Otherwise, the only thing this does is add one extra step ( and additional cost which doesn't matter since taxpayers are footing the bill ) for the Feds to break into your phone.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#5Relevant excerpt: > “The undersigned finds that a biometric feature is analogous to the 20 nonverbal, physiological responses elicited during a polygraph test, which are used to determine guilt or innocence, and are considered testimonial.” So it's analogous to a passcode because you're divulging something stored by your body, as opposed to e.g. a metal key which is artificial. Tangentially related, it's astounding t…
Look up studies on the reliability of witness testimony if you want to get really scared on how courts run.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#6Relevant excerpt: > “The undersigned finds that a biometric feature is analogous to the 20 nonverbal, physiological responses elicited during a polygraph test, which are used to determine guilt or innocence, and are considered testimonial.” So it's analogous to a passcode because you're divulging something stored by your body, as opposed to e.g. a metal key which is artificial. Tangentially related, it's astounding t…
Look up studies on the reliability of witness testimony if you want to get really scared on how courts run.
Even forensic science can be used questionably. Really, once you're in the court room it's entirely rhetoric and fudge-factor.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#7But can they seize your phone and crack it and look through your stuff without your permission or getting a warrant/judicial oversight? Otherwise, the only thing this does is add one extra step ( and additional cost which doesn't matter since taxpayers are footing the bill ) for the Feds to break into your phone.
Law enforcement is permitted to do that only if they have a warrant. The question is whether they can compel you to give up a password (mostly no) or compel you to give up biometric key (unknown, but this court says no).
And it is not just an extra step. Cracking an encryption is infeasible or extremely expensive when properly encrypted.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#8But can they seize your phone and crack it and look through your stuff without your permission or getting a warrant/judicial oversight? Otherwise, the only thing this does is add one extra step ( and additional cost which doesn't matter since taxpayers are footing the bill ) for the Feds to break into your phone.
They do need a warrant now, although they did not used to, and obviously don't need one if you hand an unlocked phone over upon request (same as if you go along with 'let me see your backpack').
It's unlikely this ruling will be upheld since providing biometrics to unlock a phone is difficult to construe as 'testimony' since it's performing an action, like complying with a court order to unlock your front door in response to a warrant should you not desire for the police to kick said door in.
The biggest gray area currently is whether typing in a password is 'something you do' or 'something you know', and you can find different precedent to support both conclusions in US jurisprudence for the time being. Hopefully SCOTUS will come down on the side of 'something you know' if/when such a case ever makes it before them.
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#9Relevant excerpt: > “The undersigned finds that a biometric feature is analogous to the 20 nonverbal, physiological responses elicited during a polygraph test, which are used to determine guilt or innocence, and are considered testimonial.” So it's analogous to a passcode because you're divulging something stored by your body, as opposed to e.g. a metal key which is artificial. Tangentially related, it's astounding t…
I thought that polygraphs were not accepted as evidence in court, but are still used by some government and private agencies.
Also, just curious, have they been discredited as in that double-blind trials show no more than a 50/50 chance of being correct (i.e., flipping a coin)? Or is it that a high enough percentage of people will fail them even if innocent, or pass them even if guilty?
The thing I don't like about them is the method of reading them, where it is up to the subjective judgment of the examiner. That is, there isn't an algorithm that can be written down so that, for example, an untrained person or computer program can read it (and therefore be subjected to large enough random tests).
Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look up studies on the reliability of witness testimony if you want to get really scared on how courts run.
Even forensic science can be used questionably. Really, once you're in the court room it's entirely rhetoric and fudge-factor.
Agreed.
Pretty much everything in forensic science turns out to be junk science over a long enough timeline. Hair, bite marks, fire progression, all junk. There's even a few cracks in the fingerprint wall. Don't get me started on all the field test kits of various types that LEOs use.
The only things that seem to be reliable are things that don't have their roots in forensic science (e.g. using DNA to identify people) and even then you still have to depend on a crime lab (run by the people doing the prosecuting) to not be sloppy.