I'm with you on this one.
How about bugging someone's home? As long as they're following the law, no big deal, right?
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.
Norway to Force Accused Criminal to Unlock His Phone via Fingerprint
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How about bugging someone's home? As long as they're following the law, no big deal, right?
What if it were illegal to belong to a certain religion or be a member of a political party or even be a descendant of a particular ethnicity?
hmm. What if he simply reboots the phone and refuse to give the police the passcode?
For all of you do-gooders, think of this scenario... some guy using has contact info about his dealer on his phone. The guy gets busted, but if he gets his dealer in trouble, the dealer could put a hit out on his family, etc.
Now, given that scenario, do you really think it's far fetched that one might want a 6-digit code after a few hours, or even better, a different 6-digit WIPE CODE?
Now, given that scenario, do you really think it's far fetched that one might want a 6-digit code after a few hours, or even better, a different 6-digit WIPE CODE?
Norwegian law doesn't require precedent. They are interested in other crimes and other criminals.
It would be a bad idea to try and apply the American or British legal systems to this discussion.
I won't even bother to go into all of the reasons why your posts exhibit a level of ignorance that is frightening. Since you obviously have no clue what the provisions of the Constitution prohibiting self incrimination and illegal search and seizure mean I will just say that I am happy that you don't have any say in the matter. I am highly disturbed, however in the suspicion that there are many ignorant souls such as yourself who have absolutely no realization what the Constitution really stands for, and how powerful an instrument it is in protecting your freedoms and rights.
We're done here.
He will be fine. He has Facebook installed so there is no way the battery lasted past 12 hours anyway.
Im assuming you've never been arrested
Taking the phone off you is one of the first things they'll do. Sometimes they'll put it in a faraday bag too to stop wipe commands etc being sent to it, although not for something like a basic possession charge I wouldn't have thought.
[doublepost=1455112905][/doublepost]
Thats quite an extreme example....... Probably more relevant to the US than most of europe
As well as needing the code after 48 hours of disuse, it seems that iOS 9 requires it once each week as well.
Even though I use my iPhone every day, I get prompted for the code about every seven days.
This will be important in the U.S. where Judges have said that it's possible to require the fingerprint. But long-standing rulings mean that you can not be required to give the password (something that's in your head).
Well I can't disagree with that logic, but if you are innocent and have nothing to hide, then go ahead and look at the phone.
I guess I must be boring, I've never wanted or needed to joke about killing someone, in the government or not. It should be difficult to bring any additional charges against someone if they were looking for evidence relating to A and find evidence relating to B. But that may very well not be the case. Lots of different government agencies out there with different rules and regulations. I would think a good lawyer should be able to get someone out of that though. But again, if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to hide.
Jesus, lets stay on topic here. Its not that slippery of a slope.
What are you talking about? What if aliens come down from the sky tomorrow and take over the planet? What if Jesus (who doesn't exist) comes down and takes his "children" next Tuesday? We can "What if..." forever. It is not illegal to belong to any religion, it is not illegal to be a member of any political party and it is not illegal to be a descent and of a particular ethnicity. Until any of those are illegal, there is nothing to worry about. If any of that ever were to occur then we would face much larger challenges than what is being discussed here today. Much larger, and more important, challenges.
I actually have no issue with this. If I had a key to a locked container, the government could get a search warrant to find the key or subpoena me to give up the key. The fingerprint is the same thing in this situation - it is the key to access the phone. This is not a back door or a compromise to encryption. This is going through the legal process to lawfully gain access to potential evidence.
The reality of course, as has been stated previously in this thread, is that it may all be for not. It is not clear what, if anything, they can get off a phone that could have been wiped remotely, or used additional apps to ensure there is no evidence on the phone. But it does set precedence that they can force you to give the law access to your phone. As long as it goes through due process and a court order, I believe it is reasonable. Way better than no process and the NSA simply hacking in whenever they want without just cause.
All three of those things were illegal in Norway in the '40s. And all three of those things are illegal today, elsewhere in the world.
As far as I know I'm innocent of even minor crimes; I know that my phone contains absolutely no illegal nor generally incriminating information. I still have a lot to hide, like my calendar, my emails, my contacts, my passwords, my music, and every other bit of data on there. Why on Earth would I allow anyone to peruse my property and information for no reason?
I have successfully registered the tip of my...
...elbow. Not sure what you thought I was going to write.
I recently adopted Runbox as an email provider because of Norway's famous privacy laws, which is good for my business and clients. Hosting email and websites in the US is becoming less and less attractive. So this report of a person in Norway being forced to unlock their phone with a fingerprint is so contrary to those privacy laws.
[doublepost=1455146850][/doublepost]
Well, it's not for "no reason". But I agree with you. May as well attach a probe to our brains.
[doublepost=1455146850][/doublepost]
Well, it's not for "no reason". But I agree with you. May as well attach a probe to our brains.
You can dig out your phone from a pocket and hand it over to the officer while turning it off. And it's unlikely he will notice what happens unless he expects you to do so beforehand.
In the context of the article you are correct, it's not "no reason"; however, in the context of imola.zhp's reply, it is "no reason" since he's advocating allowing authorities to look at one's data even if one is completely innocent.
I'm sure that somewhere, in a dark and isolated back room, the US powers that be are working on those probes right now.
What if I told the FBI that I planted a bomb that would kill hundreds of thousands in an unknown location, and the only way to turn off the timer to stop the bomb and find it's location, would be to unlock my phone which I refuse to do? THEN WHAT?? 
I honestly can't tell if this is sacastic or serious.What if I told the FBI that I planted a bomb that would kill hundreds of thousands in an unknown location, and the only way to turn off the timer to stop the bomb and find it's location, would be to unlock my phone which I refuse to do? THEN WHAT??
It already does for pin-only (I have mine set to 15 minutes), but when you use fingerprint for unlocking your iPhone, the only option is immediately, which in my opinion makes it a hassle.
I don't see a fundamental difference.
The problem is you're forgetting about the presumption of innocence. You can't have a system where the government can only search guilty people, because you don't know they're guilty yet. At least in the USA, that happens after due process and a conviction by a jury of their peers in a court of law. Not when law enforcement is poking around your phone to see if you done what they think you done.
The difference is that if you refuse to open the locked box, the police has the right to take a crowbar and open it with force. You don't have the choice between opening it and not opening it, you have the choice between having an undamaged box and a damaged box. So in the case of the box, nobody ever really cared whether you have the right to not open it. It didn't make a practical difference. The police has the right to crack the password on your iPhone. They just don't have the ability, so suddenly it makes a difference.
That is if the police can prove already that it is your iPhone with your data. If they don't know it is yours, then the fact that you have the passcode proves it. And therefore you don't have to unlock it. But if they know it is yours, then the fact that you know the passcode isn't evidence against you, and you have to unlock it. (Let's say you had a jailbroken phone that the police can hack; they find tons of evidence that the owner of the phone is a dangerous criminal, but no evidence that the owner is you. So they could lock the phone again and ask you to unlock it and get you convicted as soon as you unlock the phone because the unlocking itself is evidence).
What if I told the FBI that I planted a bomb that would kill hundreds of thousands in an unknown location, and the only way to turn off the timer to stop the bomb and find it's location, would be to unlock my phone which I refuse to do? THEN WHAT??
In that case, I wouldn't be too astonished if the FBI would decide to break the law and make you unlock the phone by using means so you cannot refuse. They would then either find out that you were saying the truth, and you would disappear, or they would find out that you are a total idiot and you would disappear in a mental institution.
Put yourself in the FBI agent's situation: If he does nothing, hundreds of thousands of people might die. If he breaks one finger in your hands after the other until you unlock the phone, hundreds of thousands of people might be saved, and worst case he goes to jail for a short time. What would I do in that situation?
Last edited:
I'm aware that the phone will be taken away. What I'm saying is that he reboots the phone when they give it to him for the thumb print, although depending on the situation, that might be possible.