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

US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

techspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#261

Post by qurren »

cameldrv wrote: post #74

I’ve seen a lot of people on the internet over the years say things like “the government can’t make x illegal, it’s just y.” For example, the government can’t make wiping your phone at the border illegal, it’s just punching four numbers into your phone, just like a pin, only a different four numbers, which could just have well been your pin. U.S. law though is highly non-autistic and what you were trying to do is jus…

Would it have been wiser if that person had, as a US citizen, just refused to provide a PIN? At the most they'd just confiscate the phone, and it'd be encrypted anyway. No actual destruction of anything.

On another note, maybe GrapheneOS should add some kind of feature where the phone involuntarily destructs if a correct PIN isn't entered for 48 hours (or whatever the user sets at installation time, and changing the value should not be permitted). That way the trigger for the wipe is the confiscation, not the act of entry of a duress PIN. You could disclose the mechanism to the officials who intend to confiscate, and also say (truthfully) that you have no control over the feature.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#262

Post by sqemo »

Georgelemental wrote: post #139
cameldrv wrote: post #74

I’ve seen a lot of people on the internet over the years say things like “the government can’t make x illegal, it’s just y.” For example, the government can’t make wiping your phone at the border illegal, it’s just punching four numbers into your phone, just like a pin, only a different four numbers, which could just have well been your pin. U.S. law though is highly non-autistic and what you were trying to do is jus…

A duress pin is useful if the cost of the government getting mad at you because you wiped your data is less than the cost of letting the government have your data. Whether that holds depends on your situation—for example, whether your phone's data could implicate other people that you want to protect

I think it's a matter of personal privacy. You shouldn't show it to other people.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#263

Post by throwaforfeds1 »

godwinson__4-8 wrote: post #121
cameldrv wrote: post #74

I’ve seen a lot of people on the internet over the years say things like “the government can’t make x illegal, it’s just y.” For example, the government can’t make wiping your phone at the border illegal, it’s just punching four numbers into your phone, just like a pin, only a different four numbers, which could just have well been your pin. U.S. law though is highly non-autistic and what you were trying to do is jus…

"U.S. law though is highly non-autistic" hilarious but also another point to emphasize is how truly depressing American courts often are. Take the right to a jury. It sounds noble in theory. But when they say judged by your peers they don't mean your actual peers. It's people who couldn't get out of jury duty. Prosecutors have high success rates. Federal prosecutor success rate is over > 90%. Studies of jury psycholo…

> Remember what happened to Aaron Swartz.

Indeed. There are certainly parallels between him and Sam Tunick. But I'm not sure the public is ready for all the parallels.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#264

Post by stickfigure »

nkrisc wrote: post #96
reenorap wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have the duress PIN on sticker on your phone. Maybe put it backwards and don’t say anything to border patrol. Have them try it out and erase the phone and then you can legitimately say you didn’t do anything and they did it themselves.

But if the prosecutors can make a convincing argument that your intent was exactly that all along, then you may end up convicted anyway. Intent matters. It might be hard to prove, but it matters. It may not even be that hard; what other possible explanation is there for someone putting a PIN visible on their phone that wipes it while crossing a border?

> what other possible explanation is there for someone putting a PIN visible on their phone that wipes it while crossing a border?

Two obvious answers:

1. It's for the general case of lost/stolen phone.

2. It's for the owner. I can't remember numbers I don't type in, might as well keep it visible on the device.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#266

Post by ytoawwhra92 »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #225
xdennis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who said it was evidence? Did a judge authorize or issue a warrant to collect said evidence? Absent that, it's just your property, and you can do with it as you please. Why do people go sovereign citizen when reality doesn't work their way? Stop imagining that the way you want things to be is the way things really are. Cops do not need a judge to authorize the seizing of evidence. Cops do not need judges to decide…

How about, is there reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred?

Not required at an airport, for whatever reason.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#267

Post by grey413 »

fluidcruft wrote: post #15
gruez wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How are they going to prove there was evidence of a crime? They don't have to, only that you destroyed evidence. That's why many people get prosecuted with "obstruction of justice" rather than the actual crime. >While destruction of potential evidence does introduce a certain amount of leeway that doesn't allow going from absolutely nothing to "evidence was on the wiped device". So if someone was doing insider tradi…

Destroyed evidence of what?

To quote the article: suspected terrorism activities because of his alleged association with the movement against Cop City

Complete horseshit on many levels, but presumably a legally valid investigation.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#268

Post by qlte »

sire-vc wrote: post #226

To everyone who thinks this is somehow a violation of rights: if you were being questioned by border officers, and were asked 'Sir could you please open your suitcase', and you pressed a button that caused it to burst into flames, there isn't a country in the entire world that wouldn't arrest you on the spot. Why would 'wipe a phone when officer requests it opened' be treated any differently? Suspicious behaviour is…

Yes, they would be rightfully arrested for setting off an explosive device in an airport. This analogy ... isn't great.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#269

Post by ytoawwhra92 »

Guvante wrote: post #24
gruez wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How are they going to prove there was evidence of a crime? They don't have to, only that you destroyed evidence. That's why many people get prosecuted with "obstruction of justice" rather than the actual crime. >While destruction of potential evidence does introduce a certain amount of leeway that doesn't allow going from absolutely nothing to "evidence was on the wiped device". So if someone was doing insider tradi…

They need to prove you destroyed evidence, you have the mens rea component with the deceptive pin code but the defense can simply plainly say they didn't want the police to read their private device. Your example is fabricated since the justice department didn't even bring forward a specific crime they believe was committed here. If they charged him with a crime and had evidence his device had evidence of that crime…

> But again where is the crime?

Destruction or removal of property to prevent seizure.

CBP are empowered to search US citizens devices and, if the citizen refuses to comply, to seize that device. They'll be alleging that by knowingly providing CBP with a duress PIN he destroyed his own property to prevent its seizure.

Notably, they don't need to prove he destroyed evidence of anything.

Re: US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

#270

Post by ordu »

tripleee wrote: post #77
AngryData wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile cops can and do regularly deceive and lie to citizen and not only don't face any consequences but actively benefit from it.

I don't really see a problem with this assuming the deception is used to uncover crimes.

There is a general wisdom: if you invoke "the ends justify the means" you have crossed the border to the Dark Side.

I'm not going to explain my full understanding of this piece of wisdom, it would be a wall of text, I want just mention that this behavior is addictive: it is much easier to start justifying your means than to stop it. And over time those justifications become more and more flexible.

I'm ready to agree that there are situations in which ends justify the means, but if you are not aware of downsides in your particular case, and if it doesn't seem controversial to you, you are most likely mistaken and the ends do not justify the means.

Post reply on HN