Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Court Rules Police Can Force Users to Unlock iPhones With Fingerprints, But Not Passcodes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They can have my fingerprint all they want from a court order, but the only thing they will get it on is an official government print card. Otherwise, they better start lifting prints elsewhere and learn how to make it usable for the iPhone.
This isn't a bad idea, but what if touch ID fails? Some people could possibly accidentally cut or slightly burn a finger.
I don't think you understand; they are not talking about using fingerprints but your actual finger. The judge is just being consistent. They can get warrants to have your blood drawn for say DUI/DWI cases or your DNA taken in rape cases. They can't use a warrant to force you to divulge information in your head, that would be considered self incrimination.
The police ARE standing up for our rights and freedoms by tracking down and punishing those who take our rights and freedoms. They are trying to confirm or get additional evidence against a man who allegedly killed a woman - thereby taking away HER rights and freedoms.
There is a delicate balancing act the police have to follow to catch criminals and protect citizens and it is not a perfect system but it is better than what else is out there.
Funny world...
How about the cop in LA who would take female DUI/DWI suspects phones and while they're in custody search their phones for naked selfies and then download them to his phone and share them with other officers. Dumb ass was stupid enough to send them to his own phone without wiping out the text log on the girls phone and one woman noticed and filed charges against him. They are talking about charging him with felony computer theft among other things. He's on administrative desk duty until the case is over. Just like there are some stupid people there are also some stupid cops.
How about the cop in LA who would take female DUI/DWI suspects phones and while they're in custody search their phones for naked selfies and then download them to his phone and share them with other officers. Dumb ass was stupid enough to send them to his own phone without wiping out the text log on the girls phone and one woman noticed and filed charges against him. They are talking about charging him with felony computer theft among other things. He's on administrative desk duty until the case is over. Just like there are some stupid people there are also some stupid cops.
Ah, yes. I understand. So the judge's reasoning is this: unlocking your phone is a search, which is governed by the same rules as a search of your home.
Currently while you can use Touch ID for most things, you still need a passcode, which can be a simple passcode, on reboot or after too many Touch ID attempts and the passcode can also be used directly to unlock even if the Touch ID is setup. I'm just suggesting Apple offer an enhanced security option where any situation that previously required just a Touch ID would require a Touch ID + simple passcode and any situation that previously required a passcode would require that passcode by a complex passcode. That complex passcode can always supersede the Touch ID + simple passcode. For convenience the simple passcode could be derived from the complex passcode, for example, be the first four digits.
But in his case, the fingerprint itself does not tie him in with the attack....it enables the police to then view other information. That will be what the appeals court hangs on to to overturn this decision.
In the meantime, all someone needs to do is to us the wrong finger a few times and then it will require a passcode...or just reboot the phone and a passcode will be required. Besides, most criminals use Android phones
The courts are a joke
I notice that the courts side a majority of the time with gov't or police power over people. The courts are nothing but a rubber stamp for whatever the cops or other branches of govt want to do. So I dont care what the courts say anymore. They are not the final authority anyhow. We are.
I notice that the courts side a majority of the time with gov't or police power over people. The courts are nothing but a rubber stamp for whatever the cops or other branches of govt want to do. So I dont care what the courts say anymore. They are not the final authority anyhow. We are.
Will not be held on appeal.
This is not a Fifth Amendment issue, this is a Fourth Amendment issue, To whit:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, ..."
You iPhone and its contents are you effects. It is not the lock on your front door of your house that the Constitution protects, it is the contents.
Damn party hack judges!
This is not a Fifth Amendment issue, this is a Fourth Amendment issue, To whit:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, ..."
You iPhone and its contents are you effects. It is not the lock on your front door of your house that the Constitution protects, it is the contents.
Damn party hack judges!
Last edited:
I think it can be successfully argued that a fingerprint used for Touch ID is the equivalent to a security passcode.
This is a single state court dude. It has no authority outside of that area of Virginia.
The Fourth Amendment doesn't ban the police from searches, BTW. It just says they need probable cause for warrants. It doesn't actually say they need warrants though, weirdly.
Just toying with you. Like most people on here, I'd just unlock it for them - I have nothing to hide anyway.
Info from your phone can potentially be turned against you, for example, if it contradicts your earlier statement - lying to the police will get you in trouble.
That's only if you lie to them in the first place. As I said, I have nothing to hide and this is all hypothetical as no crime has been committed.
I mean, people get arrested without having broken the law all the time and you may still have entirely legitimate reasons for not wanting your phone contents to be examined under the microscope in a court.
