Court Rules Police Can Force Users to Unlock iPhones With Fingerprints, But Not Passcodes

[yaxomoxay]

Ha, no no that makes way too much sense. Let's figure out a way to break the law and get away with it.

That's not the purpose of the fifth amendment, and it's not the reason of the whole debate. The fifth amendment protects the basic human right of a fair trial. Without the fifth amendment you could be forced to admit a crime that you didn't do. without the fifth amendment cops and judges would have the ultimate power of life (ok, they sorta have it).
And no, it's not right to incriminate an innocent in order to get a guilty part.

 

[Piggie]

Easy: don't break the law.

Everyone breaks the law.

It just depends which laws

 

[DooDuh]

The Supreme Court ruled last summer that police must get a warrant before searching the cell phones of people they arrest. Wouldn't that give a person the time needed to disable the touch ID?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-06-25/supreme-court-tells-cops-to-get-a-warrant-for-cell-phone-searches

 

[fotomarc]

Court Rules Police Can Force Users to Unlock iPhones With Fingerprints, But N...

If you're s criminal don't use Touch ID and don't store evidence on your iPhone. For anyone else who gives a s%#t?

Unless of course you use your phone when your driving, have an accident and they want to check when you were last on the phone! Then you are in deep s%#t!

 

[WrQth]

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...

IFTTT can send an email to someone who could then go in and perform whatever action needed but maybe that could be considered destruction of evidence.

 

[charlituna]

After 48 hours, 5 bad attempts, or a power-cycle, the fingerprint isn't useful any more. You need the passcode.

Plus, nothing saying you need to tell them which finger is the right finger to use... Just use the wrong finger a few times. Which finger unlocks the device would be the same as the passcode.. You can't be compelled to use the correct finger.

Actually if this gents opinion stands you could be charged with interfering with an investigation etc if you don't give them the right info. Then again the few weeks you might spend in jail for that could be worth it if you get out of years in jail over something else.

 

[yaxomoxay]

If you're s criminal don't use Touch ID and don't store evidence on your iPhone. For anyone else who gives a ****?

No crimes here, yet I do give a f- about my privacy.

 

[rdlink]

WTF!?! I can think of no legitimate reason why a judge would rule this way. I hope the appellate court's ruling reversing this also includes an impeachment.

 

[Primejimbo]

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.

I thought there wasn't a way for this with iOS 8 according to Apple.

 

[Hitch08]

The Courts struggle with technology.

 

[charlituna]

The judge is nuts. Or the law is. Or this society is. What ever happened to "the intent of the law" or "the intent of Congress"? Either people can be compelled to log in to their phones or they can't be. Differentiating between knowledge of your passcode & fingerprint login is splitting hairs in a way that makes a mockery of "justice".

Again this is a circuit court judge. Bottom of the totem pole ultimately. If this guys defense lawyer has any clue he'll appeal up the chain and it will likely be overturned

 

[Glideslope]

Obviously the phone is either without power or turned off by now?

A Touch ID phone requires the passcode after restart before Tiuch ID is activated.

Correct?

 

[Born Again]

The fingerprint sensor on my iPhone 6 plus hardly ever works so good luck police.

I can't even unlock it.

 

[i-John]

i know which finger will unlock this phone?
it's a one digit passcode essentially.
you're welcome lawyers of the defendant

They can take all your prints and figure it out themselves. They don't need your finger.

 

[charlituna]

Keep in mind this decision is by a circuit court judge.

It's only enforceable in the judge's district.

There is a danger in precedent. Circuit Court judges often look to each other for how to decide identical questions. So this guy might inspire other judges to make the same ruling.

This will probably wind up at the Supreme Court.

or at least Appeals as either one can overrule a circuit judge

 

[unplugme71]

You can also use a longer numeric code. Making your pin 6 or 8 characters long (with, ideally, repeating digits) makes it next to impossible to guess. Also, easier to enter than a complex alphanumeric password.

How is repeating digits more helpful other than to the person attempting to access your device?

 

[The Doctor11]

This is such ********.

But we can still spit on our fingers and then it won't work

 

[yaxomoxay]

The fingerprint sensor on my iPhone 6 plus hardly ever works so good luck police.

I can't even unlock it.

Trust me, it will work whenever you don't want it to. And Safari will be so snappier that it will pre load x-rated images for you and the cops to see as soon as the phone is unlocked.

 

[pmjoe]

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...

You're looking at this backwards. In this case, the fingerprint is no different than a key to a door. If I get a warrant to search your house, I can compel you to provide the key to open the door. The fingerprint is the key to the phone's door.

The argument made by the judge here is that a passcode itself might be self-incriminating under the 5th amendment - the passcode itself, not what's behind it on the phone. The passcode is protected knowledge, it's not a physical key like a fingerprint can be.

 

[jrswizzle]

That's not the purpose of the fifth amendment, and it's not the reason of the whole debate. The fifth amendment protects the basic human right of a fair trial. Without the fifth amendment you could be forced to admit a crime that you didn't do. without the fifth amendment cops and judges would have the ultimate power of life (ok, they sorta have it).
And no, it's not right to incriminate an innocent in order to get a guilty part.

I understand. I'm not trying to enter in this debate. I thought it was funny that people were providing ways to get around having to unlock the device, and the poster I quoted provided the best advice thus far.

 

[ghettochris]

You've never been arrested have you. Good luck with turning your iPhone off.

All you need is 4 seconds holding down button and a quick swipe to power down phone, I expect I could find that time in just about every arrest scenario.

 

[the8thark]

So if you get arrested, turn off your phone. It requires a passcode after a reboot.

If you are arrested and cuffed, you do not have a free hand to turn off the phone. This is like, finger print tech so cool, but so pointless if the police can force us to Touch ID unlock our phones anytime they feel like it.

 

[charlituna]

What the police have and what is stored on your iPhone through the finger sensor/imaging I don't believe are the same things.

The police does not have a multi dermal layer skin reading that is used to create a code. The police have an ink impression on the ridges of the outer layer of the skin on your finger.

it has been proven more than once that it is possible to fool the sensor if you can get a perfect lift of the correct finger. MR as I recall even posted articles about it after the 5S came out

 

[i-John]

The Supreme Court ruled last summer that police must get a warrant before searching the cell phones of people they arrest. Wouldn't that give a person the time needed to disable the touch ID?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-06-25/supreme-court-tells-cops-to-get-a-warrant-for-cell-phone-searches

They take the phone as evidence, then get the warrant to search it.

 

[yaxomoxay]

I understand. I'm not trying to enter in this debate. I thought it was funny that people were providing ways to get around having to unlock the device, and the poster I quoted provided the best advice thus far.

Understood