Privacy

10826 readers

140 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

Be civil
No spam posting
Keep posts on-topic
No trolling

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

iopq@lemmy.world

147

Returning from vacation? The government can search your phone without a warrant. (arstechnica.com)

submitted 2 days ago by schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to c/privacy@lemmy.world

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Wasn't a guy persecuted for using kill switch just for that?

[–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Yep, specifically for ~~entering~~ providing the duress password for the ICEstapo agent to into his phone that had GrapheneOS on it to wipe it before ~~handing it over to~~ it was taken by the authorities.

Which led to DHS/CBP prosecuting him for "evidence tampering".

[–] 13igtyme@startrek.website 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I'd still rather wipe my phone than openly give it to authorities. Guy should have had a better lawyer. Being arrested for evidence tampering when there is no crime is practically the same as being arrested with the only charge being resisting arrest. Good lawyer gets that case thrown out.

[–] UnrefinedChihuahua@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure the LEO entered the password, he just provided it.

[–] ITGuyLevi@programming.dev 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean they didn't specify which PIN they wanted, just that he hand over the PIN for his phone and that he could not speak to anyone (lawyer, someone that knows his rights, etc). I don't know your definition of duress, but that situation fits mine and I would have given them the same PIN.

The border bitches asked a poorly worded question, made assumptions about the answer, and proceeded to wipe his phone and blame him for it.

[–] UnrefinedChihuahua@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago

I 100% agree and I didn't even think about the vagueness of their question given the possible responses.

I was just clarifying that the Leo's entered the password, not him.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip -5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

No. They already had him and the device, and he gave them the wipe pin when they asked him for the unlock pin. That's destruction of evidence.

[–] superglue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Destruction of what evidence? They didn't have the phone unlocked. How do they even know anything was destroyed?

They've got nothing and it's going be dismissed.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip -3 points 1 day ago

Sure, you try that in court. See how it goes for you.