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

281–290 of 294 posts

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

#281

Post by samstave »

zik wrote: post #44
derekp7 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> have they been discredited as in that double-blind trials show no more than a 50/50 chance of being correct? Yes. The reading of polygraphs is very subjective and it's been found that they reflect only whether the person administering the test thinks the subject is guilty.

I know this will sound stupid - but its a serious showerthought of a question:

Are "clearers" from Scientology any 'better' at reading a polygraph than non-"clearers"

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

#282

Post by chooseaname »

pc86 wrote: post #254
chooseaname wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I thought that polygraphs were not accepted as evidence in court... Only if you "pass". Fail one and admissible or not, it'll be brought up.

> admissible or not, it'll be brought up That's not how it works, and even a public defender working 20 hour days who doesn't know their defendant's name would be able to get a mistrial.

In the stairwell outside the court room:

"Look, I know your guy went for a polygraph, but you've not brought it up, so I assume he didn't do well. Here's what I can offer..."

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

#283

Post by cmplxconjugate »

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.

I once had to go to court as an individual had attempted to stab myself and another (we had tried to stop them from escaping the police).

During the suspect identification process I failed completely; the suspect was bald and had a spider tattoo on their face. I realised that I couldn’t even remember how they looked, it shocked me quite a lot. I assume it was the adrenaline.

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

#284

Post by foxhill »

rayiner wrote: post #218
foxhill wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

bear in mind that whilst the scope of those ammendments may have been, for want of a better term, “extended” (SC sets precedent for interpretation, as far as i’m aware, i.e. the amendments do not actually change), you must also bear in mind that the scope and power of the government has expanded incredibly since they were written. the concept of privacy, outside of say, what a married couple do in the bedroom, didn’t…

Your premise simply isn’t true. Privacy as a concept did exist, including in the law, for example in connection with correspondence and diaries. If you read those materials from that time, you’ll see that they were in many cases far more intimate than what you might find in an iPhone today. (People used to record their private thoughts in their papers. Today, people usually don’t leave a record of things that they we…

note that the interception of most correspondence, e.g. mail, is still a federal offence. additionally, the record of that correspondence can easily be erased. no warrant exists to recover the contents of a burnt letter, i.e., compel someone to testify against themselves.

additionally, one would have to prove an entry in a diary was written by the person that allegedly wrote it. or even that it was owned by that person.

i feel you’re being disingenuous with regard to how much of our lives get recorded, either directly or implicitly, on our devices. concerns on this level simply didn’t exist. giving law enforcement access to your phone is allowing for some level of intrusion into your mind.

i doubt the founding fathers were thinking about how your strava runs could be used to “testify” against yourself, if you happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

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

#285

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

mikeash wrote: post #41
justadudeama wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt it, even for American citizens at the border. The "Border search exception" pretty much says that anywhere within 100 miles of a boarder, the fourth amendment doesn't apply[1]. I imagine they would make a similar rule for the fifth amendment. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

Citizens can’t be denied entry. Worst case if you refuse to turn over your phone password is a short (hours, maybe days) detention, and confiscation of your phone. Non-citizen admittance is at the discretion of the immigration officer and they can turn you away for just about any reason. Either way, yes, this ruling wouldn’t change anything there.

Driving through, they can do friendly things like dismantle your car looking for contraband.

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

#286

Post by auiya »

xfer wrote: post #216
5ML wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fear I'll be barbecued for asking, but I must: What's the alternative? I am a privacy advocate and understand that the law can (and likely will) abuse a forced decryption law. However, the story you linked is about a _police officer_ who was suspected of child pornography. His sister reported him to the police and 'content stored on the encrypted hard drive matched file hashes for known child pornography content'.…

> 'content stored on the encrypted hard drive matched file hashes for known child pornography content Sounds like BS to me, how can they match hash of encrypted content without the key?

That's because it is BS and this is not how cryptography works. Either the drive was decrypted and they have the file hashes, or the drive was encrypted and they don't. Or they caught the transfers on the wire, but this is much less likely, and impossible to determine if they were recorded on the HDD, because it's encrypted.

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

#287

Post by vxNsr »

stef25 wrote: post #268
vxNsr wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How can you look in the mirror and think he should go free without the evidence being examined? I couldn't live in a world where a suspect could say "Well, I forgot the password" and walk away Scott-free on such an ugly crime. This is the price we pay for an imperfect world, I'd rather a few murderers walk than many innocent men be imprisoned. Your balanced, nuanced idealism simply doesn't work at scale, you cannot…

How does not being able to force someone to decrypt their hard drive overlap with innocent men being imprisoned?

It's potentially happening right now.

While circumstantial evidence would suggest the cop who is being asked to decrypt his computer is in fact guilty of at the very least looking at child porn, we don't know concretely, yet he is being jailed until the judge decides that he really won't release the password. Imagine a less scrupulous judge and a more innocent man, maybe he's trying to protect the identity of source, suddenly it doesn't seem fair that the man should be jailed, yet in a world where we can compel you to release the password both cases are the same.

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

#288

Post by SEJeff »

samstave wrote: post #281
zik wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> have they been discredited as in that double-blind trials show no more than a 50/50 chance of being correct? Yes. The reading of polygraphs is very subjective and it's been found that they reflect only whether the person administering the test thinks the subject is guilty.

I know this will sound stupid - but its a serious showerthought of a question: Are "clearers" from Scientology any 'better' at reading a polygraph than non-"clearers"

Auditors in scientology are in fact using a primitive polygraph device to get gullible people to divulge their deepest and darkest secrets. This is something the "church" has used to blackmail and discredit their enemies.

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

#289

Post by pseudalopex »

rjf72 wrote: post #242
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 yea…

The article about the CSI effect says it's believed to work both ways. Jurors expect more forensic evidence but put more faith in it.

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

#290

Post by 6nf »

posterboy wrote: post #259
6nf wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People can also simply lie, but statements are still considered testimony.

Yea the polygraph adds nothing useful here
Post reply on HN