you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 203 points 3 months ago (48 children)

Friendly reminder that, per the fifth amendment, you are not required to disclose your passwords to the authorities under any circumstances. This protection does not apply to biometric authentication, so don't enable those methods.

  • source
  • hideshow 48 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Yep.

    Biometrics are SUPER unsafe, and insecure, because you can be physically forced to put your finger on a sensor, or to stand still for them to hold a phone infront of your face for faceid. I've literally seen videos of cops holding a guy in a choke hold whole another cop unlocks his phone with his face.

    but they can't physically manhandle you into typing in a password.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I like to set my Biometrics to an odd finger instead of the expectation

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    We aren't quite to the torture for password stage yet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    even with torture, you'd have to voluntarily give up the password.

    as opposed to biometrics, where they can literally just overpower you and force you to use it. Or use it when you're unconscious.. or maybe even after you're dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 3 months ago (18 children)

    If you have iOS you can disable it quickly by spamming the power button (button on right hand side of screen) 5 times.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (13 children)
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    I did that, and it tried to call 911

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    For some android phones it's a setting. I have long press with an option for Lockdown and 5 click duress

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Not sure what the difference is between my adroid locking when I just tap the power button one ane when I enter lockdown mode after holding the power button. They both get to tge same needing to put in a pattern to unlock.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

    I wish I read more of this thread first. In GrapheneOS it first opened my camera app and then attempted calling 911. Freaked me out so much cause I was relaxing in bed with my titties out. Also the setting is called Emergency SOS if you want to disable it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Android varies a bit depending on the software/manufacturer. It was added in Android 9 but some software releases remove it.

    By default it is not enabled. You can search settings for "Lockdown", and then it will just be an option in the menu when you hold the power button.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Looks like it's now a permanent item in the power menu. (I just got upgraded to Android 17 and couldn't find it in settings, but it is on my power/reboot menu options already.) Thanks for the tip, I didn't even realize Android had this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    The thing with android lockdown is that it turns back off as soon as you unlock it. For something like going to an airport, I would go into settings and disable "use biometrics to unlock" under the biometric settings. Lockdown is more of an "oh shit" button, if you have the time to do it properly make it stick until you're safe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Good to know - thanks for pointing that out. On my version, if I were to simply shut down my phone, it requires a pin to start - no biometrics - and (iirc) the data contained within is encrypted until the pin is entered. So the smart play would be to simply shut it off, giben the opportunity?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I'm not saying "don't use lockdown" or "don't turn it off". What I'm saying is in addition to that if you need to unlock it while you're in the airport then you want it to not be unlockable from that point with biometrics. You want the pin to kick back on by default after it's been unlocked and relocked.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Depending on your skin color, reaching into your pocket to do this may be punishable by immediate execution. Just don't use biometrics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Depending on your skin color being pulled over is punishable by execution. It's an easy way to disable it while handing it over if you have that chance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (10 children)

    That's honestly a curiosity in this for me. You dont have to unlock your phone for them but the fact that he was made to even with a duress pass makes me think that this was more than a standard stop.

    He absolutely didnt have to unlock it under the law.

    He was within his right to wipe it.

    But what led him to doing so?

    This isnt a defence of the boarder officers. Im just curious what the other side of the story is.

    Edit: ah there it is. They suspected him of having csam and by implication being a sex tourist.

    Heavy accusations. So they did have some suspicion (or at least claimed to) to justify the search.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 115 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    From The Guardian article on the same incident:

    The defendant, Sam Tunick, was stopped for interrogation at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport on 24 January last year, after vacationing in the Dominican Republic. Unbeknown to him, federal authorities had put him on a terrorism watchlist because of his alleged association with the movement against Cop City.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 78 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Ahhhh

    thanks!

    Once again fascists cry protecting kids to violate rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Every time I hear someone invoking "protect the kids" I know 3 things.

    1. It has nothing to do with protecting kids, they're hiding their intention.
    2. It's probably some outrageous bullshit they absolutely need to hide.
    3. It's probably because they are fucking kids.

    Number 3 was added recently because apparently based on the facts we now know... that is MUCH more common with these people than I could even imagine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    That’s why I stopped using Google for anything. Their AI is calling people child abusers left and right. And even after a person is cleared by law enforcement, they will not let that person get their data back. It could be innocent family photos or legal adult content. Haven’t used their services in years after the NYT articles and the several others from other news organizations that followed about their awful practices. They don’t care about correcting false positives only about the perception to share holders that they are fighting child abuse by closing almost a million accounts a year. Same for Meta, who closes many millions of account per year to stop child abuse, while hosting child abuse for advertisers. I didn’t supply links to the articles, but they can be easily found through a StartPage or DuckDuckGo search or which ever search engine you use (hopefully not Google).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    The crazy thing is that tech CEOs hear that their bullshit machines are calling people pedos, so they look and at their own CEO social circles and see 50% are pedos, and think, “sounds about right”.

    Then they ask Grok to undress another minor.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago*

    There are some of us that know these things happen and take steps to protect our rights and personal data.

    Most all of us here have multiple methods employed to avoid being tracked online via browser plugins or whatever. Some of us take it a step further and lock our phones should an encounter with LEOs be a possibility, and he had a wipe command to go even further.

    These days the US is closer to a lot of fascist authoritarian states, and it’s probably only a short time before they throw people in jail for whatever manufactured reason because they wipe a phone before the Gestapo can pry into it and charge us with the crime of being un-American or some shit because we posted a meme mocking trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Since they just let him walk after the phone wiped itself, they clearly didn't actually believe he was a risk of any kind. If there was any actual reason for suspicion they would/should have detained him outright.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 3 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    They'd need a warrant signed by a judge to crack your passcode or everything would be inadmissible and any half-assed lawyer could win you a civil rights settlement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)