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
but but but Internet lawyers!!
You're right, there's a long road ahead before this one decision becomes settled law. Now stop being reasonable and lets get back to the entertainment.
Hey, that's a good one. Plus the pun with "digit".
It really does seems like refusing to divulge which finger should be protected. However as was pointed out if they force you to try your thumb and index finger they will get most phones unlocked anyway, so refusing to tell them might not help that much.
Right because we all know police NEVER ever arrest or imprison innocent people:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNULgQWvz8c
So setting aside the fact that this is one ruling and may well change over legal proceedings to come, you *do* realize you can choose not to use Touch ID, correct?
It already has and SCOTUS has ruled on it. The case 'Riley v. California' on June 25 2014. SCOTUS ruled that law enforcement must have a valid search warrant in order to search a mobile device. Absent a valid warrant, you cannot be required to provide access to it. This violates a person's 4th amendments rights.
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/riley-v-california/
For all of those on here replying with "don't commit a crime"; I don't think you pay much attention to what cops do nowadays. Committing a crime really doesn't matter any more as cops get away with about anything and when investigated usually just get paid leave and brought back to work again.
What happens to someone who records a cop beating a civilian for no reason, or using excessive force, or doing something else against the law? That cop could forcibly make that person unlock their phone now and erase the evidence.
We don't live in a country now where all cops protect and serve. You might want to wake up and realize that.
What happens to someone who records a cop beating a civilian for no reason, or using excessive force, or doing something else against the law? That cop could forcibly make that person unlock their phone now and erase the evidence.
We don't live in a country now where all cops protect and serve. You might want to wake up and realize that.
That precedent doesn't follow
In the instances where your DNA, handwriting or key is used, those are the actual evidences used against you. For example, if someone is in possession of a safe that had (after it's contents had been revealed) illegal items or items used in a crime, and the person's key worked on that safe, then that would be a form of evidence that could incriminate that person.
In the instance of the phone, your fingerprint is not an actual piece of evidence, but an accessory to access the evidence, just as a passcode is. Because the evidence lies unknown (locked on your phone), there is no evidence to demonstrate your guilt of committing a crime, and therefore falls under the 5th amendment.
If the question was "this phone was used to commit a crime. Is this your phone?" then they could have you use your fingerprint."
If the question is, "Please unlock this phone so that we can see if you actually committed a crime", then you are covered under the 5th amendment.
This judge should go back to law school...
In the instances where your DNA, handwriting or key is used, those are the actual evidences used against you. For example, if someone is in possession of a safe that had (after it's contents had been revealed) illegal items or items used in a crime, and the person's key worked on that safe, then that would be a form of evidence that could incriminate that person.
In the instance of the phone, your fingerprint is not an actual piece of evidence, but an accessory to access the evidence, just as a passcode is. Because the evidence lies unknown (locked on your phone), there is no evidence to demonstrate your guilt of committing a crime, and therefore falls under the 5th amendment.
If the question was "this phone was used to commit a crime. Is this your phone?" then they could have you use your fingerprint."
If the question is, "Please unlock this phone so that we can see if you actually committed a crime", then you are covered under the 5th amendment.
This judge should go back to law school...
Last edited:
kind of protected. This judge is saying you can be forced to unlock the phone via the fingerprint (or even by implication that its not fruit of a spoiled search if they use your booking prints to fool the sensor).
If they get to the point where the touch id is disabled and it will only take the passcode then that is different.
Personally I don't see the different since you are still being compelled to unlock the phone and suspect that this circuit court will be overruled and very quickly
The entire premise is stupid. I sometimes cannot get my print to work and it is not while under stress or for a sense of subterfuge.
Amazed at the naive comments, the government REGULARLY attacks innocent people and this has increased in frequency at the federal level with this administration. The department of justice is a sham. That is why you NEVER answer questions from law enforcement, even if you've done nothing wrong. Their focus is convicting you of something, that is how they are paid and promoted.
Other alternative to the problem is have a friend that can log into Find my Phone and wipe it. I wonder if there is a way to set up a failsafe IFTTT programming to wipe it.
Remember the first demos of adding your nipple to TouchID? This is the answer. Only register your nipple. They'd never guess that!
Plenty of other ways to get that data. We've been selling a product to law enforcement all over the world since 2008 that pulls all of your iPhones call logs, text messages, pictures, emails, web history, app data, voice mails, and more.
Honestly, criminals don't generally think "Oh quick, gotta turn off my phone now." They've generally got other things they're dealing with.
And digging in your pocket as an officer approaches you is a great idea if you're looking to get shot.
Its too bad that what you said is almost impossible. There is almost no way to get data from an iPhone that is locked. You make it sound like you can have the suspects phone on hand and only the suspects phone and plug it into a computer like a hard drive and get the data with your software.
In this case, they have a warrant, but they can't access the info on the phone cause they don't have the passcode.
It's also easy to get accused of a crime that you didn't commit. Do you still want your personal data out there for all to see?
Except that if you lie about anything material to a law enforcement officer that is a serious offense in and of itself, regardless of what else you did or didn't do wrong. (Of course they can and will lie to you all they want without any repercussions.)
The only correct response to any question from the police (if you're a suspect) is to assert your right not to incriminate yourself and refuse to answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
nope. completely irrelevant. you can very easily be arrested for something regardless if you broke the law.
what a silly thing to say.
Which finger I use to unlock my phone is also in my mind. That information is not avavailble to someone compelling me to unlock my device via a biometric method.
I'm just wondering if this guy forced one of your kids to undress and take pictures with his iPhone and that was the only evidence.... How would you feel about his 'privacy' rights then? A normal video camera has no pass lock but because it was a phone with a password, he may go free. Sad for the family of the real victim here.
Not really sure if IFTTT can have actions that work with iCloud/Find My iPhone (haven't used IFTTT in a while) but if so, you may have hit on a good backup plan here...