231–240 of 565 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> forced her finger on Touch ID per the warrant She was not forced, and the warrant does not state that she could be forced. The warrant, almost certainly deliberately, uses far milder language.
You’re saying she complied willingly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does mean that. You can't be forced to divulge information in your head, as that would be testimonial. But if there are papers, records, or other evidentiary materials that are e.g. locked in a safe you can be compelled to open it with a warrant, and refusal would be contempt.
FaceID and TouchID aren’t protected by that as I understand it.
So do not have biometrics as device unlock if you are a journalist protecting sources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think this is for fighting parking tickets? It is for journalists to not reveal their sources, whom might be at risk of severe consequences including death. That's a whole lot more to loose than your money and time.
That's not what we're discussing here, you can't just say "I plead the fifth" and walk away if the people in charge decided you wouldn't walk away, no matter what's right or "legal" Francis Rawls stayed 4 years in jail despite pleading the fifth all day long
> Natanson said she does not use biometrics for her devices, but after investigators told her to try, “when she applied her index finger to the fingerprint reader, the laptop unlocked.” Curious.
She has to have set it up before. There is no way to divine a fingerprint any other way. I guess the only other way would be a faulty fingerprint sensor but that should default to a non-entry.
The fingerprint sensor does not make access control decisions, so the fault would have to be somewhere else (e.g. the software code branch structure that decides what to do with the response from the secure enclave).
https://x.com/runasand/status/2017659019251343763?s=20
The FBI was able to access Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson's Signal messages because she used Signal on her work laptop. The laptop accepted Touch ID for authentication, meaning the agents were allowed to require her to unlock it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FaceID and TouchID aren’t protected by that as I understand it.
That's correct, they are not. A complete failing of legislation and blatant disregard of the spirit of the 5th Amendment. So do not have biometrics as device unlock if you are a journalist protecting sources.