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

Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 294 posts

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#241

Post by renholder »

abalone wrote: post #153

Tip 1, which most people know: To quickly disable Face/TouchID you can squeeze left and right side buttons together (any combo) for two seconds to bring up the power off display. Tip 2, which probably most people don't know: If you aren't holding the phone -- if someone shoves it in your face -- you can close your eyes to prevent FaceID from working and say "Hey Siri, who's phone is this?" Not that it's wise to do th…

>...you can close your eyes to prevent FaceID from working and say "Hey Siri, who's phone is this?"

That's specific to Apple and I wouldn't be surprised if that got you an obstruction charge in the states. Plus, if you don't produce the password, afterwards, you're now sitting in jail for contempt - even if you may have actually forgotten it.

It's a much safer avenue, legally, to just use a password to unlock the device.

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#242

Post by rjf72 »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #58
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Which CSI has done a wonderful job of turning into super-cops in the eyes of jurys.

This has had the opposite effect of what you seem to be implying. It's something that's come up quite frequently in discussions of jury nullification [1]. Jury nullification being when a jury ends up voting not guilty, even when they believe the defendant guilty, generally because they do not find the law (or possibly the punishment) just.

For decades a rate of about 5% for hung juries was typical. In more recent years some jurisdictions have seen more than 20% of cases end in hung juries. [2] Some have seen this as evidence of a rise in jury nullification, but others have argued that it's due to the 'CSI Effect' [3] with these individuals believing that, because of shows like CSI, the standard of proof required for a conviction seems to be rising - along with a reduced weighting given to things like circumstantial evidence.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

[2] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/jury080299.ht...

[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#243

Post by tedunangst »

tptacek wrote: post #129

My bet is that this doesn't stand, because (from the haphazard reading I've done) it doesn't comport with the reasoning used to allow people to refuse passwords, which is that the act of disclosing a password is a form of self-testimony --- not that rifling through a phone is intrinsically self-testimony. If I understand correctly (and there are lawyers on HN who can shoot this down) people have tried and failed to m…

But this ruling has to do with a sort of bulk unlock. Isn't there case law that the police can't go around collecting blood from a whole group looking for a match?

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#244

Post by supernova87a »

arcturus17 wrote: post #221
supernova87a wrote: post #108

I doubt this will hold up. You can be compelled by a court to have your blood withdrawn if a warrant is issued while you're under suspicion of DUI. Why would it not be similarly allowable to have your finger placed on the unlock button? Testimonial privilege (against being forced to testify) is about not being made to say / speak statements against your own prosecution. Speech. Testimony. Having evidence taken is not…

In the eyes of the law, how is this different to being compelled to give your passcode though? Of course it’s easier and they could maybe even unlock a phone with your corpse but in jurisdictions where the law protects the individual’s privacy above all else this shouldn’t make a difference.

It is fundamentally, very importantly, different.

Being compelled to say / give your password is forcing you to admit or testify that you know the code and can unlock your phone. You can choose not to give testimony (statements) that could be used against you.

On the other hand, if you are in possession of a physical key or code written on a piece of paper... or fingerprint... you can be compelled to turn that piece of evidence over to the government.

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#245

Post by amelius »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #3

Relevant 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…

> 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.

Also, shouldn't the act of entering someone's phone be analogous to entering someone's house? I.e., wouldn't a search warrant/court order be required?

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#246

Post by EliRivers »

ColanR wrote: post #50
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 along those lines, I've heard that DNA tests aren't reliable either.

Apropos of this, but about human incompetency rather than DNA tests, the Phantom of Heilbronn. A serial killer so well concealed that her very existence was only given away by DNA traces.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#247

Post by anticensor »

beatgammit wrote: post #176
dreamcompiler wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has no relevance to the Border Patrol within 100 miles of a US border or coastline, which is even more ridiculous.

Yeah, it should be more like 10 miles or less. I don't understand why they're given so much leeway.

This should have been enough:

  A. Contiguous states - 12 nautical miles towards sea, one full state inwards
  B. Alaska and Puerto Rico - 12 nautical miles towards sea, 3 nautical miles inwards
  C. Archipelagic territories (including Hawaii) - 100 nautical miles towards sea, 1 nautical mile inwards
  D. Airports - airport administrative zone

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#248

Post by lagadu »

sandworm101 wrote: post #185
77pt77 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can they possibly know that? If that is the case then there should be no problem convicting him.

They had access to the drive at one point. In a filesharing seneario it is common for feds to see what you got before the raid that grabs the physical drive.

Either what they have is enough for a conviction or it's not. If it is, then there's no need to actually get access to it, if it's not then it might as well not exist.

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#249

Post by Buttons840 »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #5
jakelazaroff wrote: post #3

Relevant 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.

The Drunkards Walk talks about the misuse of statistics in court as well. Not only do they get the math wrong easily, or make common mistakes ("the odds that it's raining given the ground is wet, is the same as the odds that the ground is wet given it's raining"), but if someone accurately states there is only a 1 in 100,000 chance of something happening by chance, the jury will think that means the "something" was not by chance, instead of "oh, so it happens by chance to thousands and thousands of people" like they should.

Re: Feds Can't Force You to Unlock Your iPhone with Finger or Face, Judge Rules

#250

Post by 6nf »

derekp7 wrote: post #9
jakelazaroff wrote: post #3

Relevant 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 t…

Individuals can also 'train' for polygraphs, basically learning to spoof the readings. So really you just can't rely on polygraphs for anything at all.
Post reply on HN