Live data from Hacker News

Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

reason.com

61–70 of 181 posts

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#61
post #31
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can demand, and you can refuse. However if you have Face ID or other biometric measures, they can (legally) force your finger onto the sensor or hold the phone up to your face to unlock it for their needs. Passwords are personal data, faces and fingerprints are not, apparently.

Five taps of power button on iPhone disables biometrics until you enter the passcode. I always do this before going through airport security

Just holding it down until it shows you the power off slider does the same. Easier to do in a panic.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#62

I’m curious, if your phone is locked, were they ever able to demand that you unlock it so they could conduct a search?

Use the most obscure fork of Android possible, learn the most obscure language in Africa and set your UI to that language, ...

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> textualist interpretation of the constitution would likely take a very dim view of the federal government trying to stretch its powers and get around the Fourth Amendment Scalia was textualist. "Justices Antonin Scalia, Amy Coney Barrett, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch describe themselves as originalists in scholarly writings and public speeches" [1]. (In several cases, e.g. the application of Sarbanes-Oxley to t…

Scalia’s originalism—the dominant strain today— is textualism, as explained in the very article you linked. Specifically it is originalism in terms of the original public meaning of the text, or in other words, textualism with the understanding that language changes over time.

> Scalia’s originalism—the dominant strain today—is textualism

Sure. As I said, "Scalia was textualist." All dachshunde are dogs. Not all dogs are dachshunde.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#64
post #62

I’m curious, if your phone is locked, were they ever able to demand that you unlock it so they could conduct a search?

Use the most obscure fork of Android possible, learn the most obscure language in Africa and set your UI to that language, ...

They just have to change the language back to English

What's the alternative? The guy paid $1000+ just to get there and spent 3+ hours at customs. Refusing is basically saying "ok I fly back home"

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#65
post #22

So these criminals that have been performing the illegal searches. The next step is they'll be charged with false imprisonment, extortion, and conspiracy, right? Oh, okay then, how about at least for deprivation of civil rights under the color of law? Well then, what about monetary damages for the people whose data was copied, devices were stolen or could no longer be trusted, wasted time and missed flights, costs of…

You can't apply the law retroactively. The law, despite being unconstitutional, allowed this, so you can't go back and arrest people who weren't breaking the law at the time. What you can do is track back every arrest that resulted from one of these searches, and ask for all charges and convictions to be vacated/overturned because the evidence was collected in an unconstitutional way. I'm more interested in damage co…

[deleted]

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#66
post #30
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can demand, and you can refuse. However if you have Face ID or other biometric measures, they can (legally) force your finger onto the sensor or hold the phone up to your face to unlock it for their needs. Passwords are personal data, faces and fingerprints are not, apparently.

>Passwords are personal data, faces and fingerprints are not, apparently. The rulings you're referring to are based on the Fifth Amendment. They don't involve the privacy rights of the Fourth Amendment. Rather, they treat the act of revealing your password as testimonial: if you say "my password is hunter2", you are testifying; and the Fifth Amendment says you cannot be forced to testify against yourself; so you cann…

That’s like saying if my house is protected by a passcode lock, the cops can just break down my door and walk in. Sure, they can, but there are clear rules of when they can enter and search my property without my consent. So, sure, they can enter my phone, but that doesn’t mean they have the right to in the first place.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#67
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can demand, and you can refuse. However if you have Face ID or other biometric measures, they can (legally) force your finger onto the sensor or hold the phone up to your face to unlock it for their needs. Passwords are personal data, faces and fingerprints are not, apparently.

For Face ID, just close your eyes.

There’s no delay. If it even sees you as you are closing your eyes, it unlocks. My son and I just tested this.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think that. I was strip searched When that came up with nothing they appeared in front of a judge claiming drug baggies were sticking out of my ass, then I was imprisoned, printed, and loaded up in a prisoner van and dragged to several hospitals while they tried to convince doctors to X-ray or invasively search me. It sounds so insane, and gross, people usually don't believe it. I was sent the medical bills when…

[flagged]

I had a cop search my car once and he “found” drug paraphernalia. I don’t do any drugs, ever in my life. I’ve seen what it does to people from a young age and I had never seen that paraphernalia ever before in my life; also, this car was brand new and I had only driven it less than two miles from the dealership. My only crime was speeding on an empty road in a brand new car, but this cop taught me they are all crooked fucks.

So, there’s probably missing information here, but I also believe it at face value.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it possible to enable CarPlay but only for Google Maps? It’s so annoying that it seems to be all or nothing.

It would not really make sense. CarPlay is just your phone using the car’s screen. How would you do that for one app and nothing else?

Many phones let you run a desktop environment on a monitor/mouse/keyboard, while still letting the phone screen act exactly like it normally does.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#70

Does this apply only to U.S. Citizens? Or does it apply to everybody? And if it does, is it reason to refuse someone? I.e. can they refuse an L1B visa holder entry because he/she doesn't allow them to search the phone?

The article does not seem to cover that question. From previous discussions I have the impression that foreigners are not granted any constitutional rights at the border or even when in their home country (their communication can be freely intercepted). So the US is nowadays on my personal list of totalitarian states that I don't want to travel to. They definitely have better legislation and courts than Russia or North Korea, but in the end the decision is, as a foreigner you don't have those rights, the government does what it sees fit.
Post reply on HN