SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the something-you-have,-something-you-are,-something-you-know dept.
FBI is quietly waging a different encryption battle in a Los Angeles courtroom. The authorities obtained a search warrant compelling the girlfriend of an alleged Armenian gang member to press her finger against an iPhone that had been seized from a Glendale home. The phone uses Apple's fingerprint identification system for unlocking. It's a rare case were prosecutors have demanded a person provide a fingerprint to unlock a computer, but experts expect such cases to become more common.
In a Circuit Court decision in Virginia 2014, the judge ruled that a criminal defendant cannot use Fifth Amendment protections to safeguard a phone that is locked using his or her fingerprint. According to Judge Steven C. Fucci, a criminal defendant can't be compelled to hand over a passcode to police officers for the purpose of unlocking a cellular device, law enforcement officials can compel a defendant to give up a fingerprint. The Fifth Amendment states that "no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself," which protects memorized information like passwords and passcodes, but it doesn't protect fingerprints in the eyes of the law. Frucci said that "giving police a fingerprint is akin to providing a DNA or handwriting sample or an actual key, which the law permits. A passcode, though, requires the defendant to divulge knowledge, which the law protects against.
In other words fingerprints are bad security. On the other hand... maybe some fingers like 9 out of 10, instead can trigger a silent self-destruct?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 03 2016, @07:38AM
For the legally challenged this is of course just the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution. In what way is imprisoning someone who refuses to testify against themselves (Fifth Amendment) by giving up their password allowing the accused to enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial? Either they should charge him with some kind of crime and start his trial or let him go. Or he needs to find a lawyer to bring this to court.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by davester666 on Tuesday May 03 2016, @08:34AM
That's just it. He hasn't been charged with anything, so there is no right to a speed and public trial.
He's in jail for not doing what a judge wants him to do, which is is merely difficult to get the same judge to reconsider, and nearly impossible to get another judge to overturn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 03 2016, @02:29PM
So basically he got kidnapped? And the ransom demanded is some information.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday May 03 2016, @05:17PM
It works like this. It's a time honored method of law enforcement. So don't complain.
You are accused of being a witch and charged with witchcraft and consorting with the devil.
The court has ordered you to be tried by dunking in order to determine if there is any validity to the charges.
The trial by dunking will show one of two results:
1. You survive the dunking, thus proving beyond all doubt you are a witch and should be burned.
2. You drown and thus the charges are dismissed.
At this point, even if he does unlock the phone, this allows the evidence to be planted.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 4, Informative) by compro01 on Tuesday May 03 2016, @10:29AM
You think that line actually still matters? That bit has been basically irrelevant since the 70s, when they found that 5 years was perfectly fine and that basically any length of time would be fine so long as the accused was not prejudiced by the delay.