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: 3, Insightful) by davester666 on Tuesday May 03 2016, @09:00AM
now they can compel you to enter your passcode via an 'all writs' warrant, without formally charging you with anything. You just have to help the police to search your phone or computer, if you don't help them, go directly to jail for contempt of court.
this has already happened.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RedBear on Tuesday May 03 2016, @09:51AM
They think they can, and a judge has been allowed to keep someone imprisoned for 7 months now for refusing to decrypt a storage device, but as others have said this seems to be a clear violation of 5th Amendment protections against being compelled to self-incriminate. I don't believe such things will survive a good Supreme Court case. I'm fairly certain there have already been multiple Supreme Court decisions making it clear that it's unconstitutional.
The All Writs act is tyranny, plain and simple, as far as I'm concerned.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ