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

301–310 of 1001 posts

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

#301

Post by itake »

ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #292
whats_a_quasar wrote: post #282

Here is the indictment: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28513012-samuel-tuni... Here is the statute Tunick is indicted under: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232 There is an immediate problem: the device was being searched, and this statute criminalizes destruction of property to prevent seizure, not searches. I don't think this statute applies this situation. Regardless of whether the border agen…

CBP are empowered to seize devices if the owner refuses a search.

Just being silly. Owner gave permission (and the pin code) that will give them access to an empty phone. No search refused.

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

#303

Post by make3 »

zarzavat wrote: post #142
morkalork wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he wasn't, what is your point?

It's possible that could be destruction of evidence as well. Why should it matter whose meat sticks type in the decoy pin?

It's harder for them to argue you were actively destroying evidence; you could say that you had written the wipe pin there for a legitimate use case like both your wallet and your phone get stolen

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

#304

Post by inigyou »

f-serif wrote: post #243
rock_artist wrote: post #236

For non-graphene users (eg. Boring iPhone people like me). So there’s a feature called Duress PIN which as explained through some comments means you put a different pin which intentionally wipes the phone. It’s not auto wipe or wipe after several failed attempts but intentional wipe of device. (Worth explanation as the current title nor the article doesn't easily explain this was made by the US citizen providing the…

PIN to wipe seems suspicious. How about a PIN where it login to a patriotic profile and phone looks like normal android.

Impossible to implement securely, so they chose not to

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

#305

Post by inigyou »

ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #269
Guvante wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Property was not destroyed or removed and can still be seized. Slam dunk for the defendant

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

#307

Post by crtified »

saimiam wrote: post #284
crtified wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why even choose a mental health condition as the linguistic pivot point for a zingy social phrase?

I think you’re trying to ask the person you are replying to not to use medical terminology to make a point in a catchy way but I honestly have no idea what the Michael Scott segue was supposed to mean.

I realised that reference would not be well understood, so edited it out.

FYI it was a reference to fictional character Michael Scott from television production The Office (US). The characters main trait was unintended verbal faux pas, where he meant well but actually caused awkwardness and offense.

Often by stereotyping the traits of specific minorities.

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

#308

Post by 8note »

SoftTalker wrote: post #256
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Federal prosecutor success rate is over > 90% Prosecutors pick their cases. Defense doesn't. The cases that aren't 90%+ sure aren't charged.

And this is as it should be.

no way!

it should be about 50% conviction rate so that juries dont go in with non-evidence that the case is good because the feds thought it should go to court

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

#309

Post by xg15 »

itake wrote: post #301
ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CBP are empowered to seize devices if the owner refuses a search.

Just being silly. Owner gave permission (and the pin code) that will give them access to an empty phone. No search refused.

I don't know, that sounds like the kind of "I'm not touching you" defense that I don't think will convince anyone with common sense. It's obvious the wipe turned a search that could potentially find something into a useless search, so I don't see why the two should be treated as equivalent.
Post reply on HN