OOOOOHHHH!!! I like that. I have nefarious ideas with that. MWA HA HA HA HA!!! They’ll never know I dislike cheesecake!!! Oh! Shit! I’ve said too much!!!
hi every1 im new!!! holds up spork my name is katy but u can call me t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m!!! lol…as u can see im very random!!! thats why i came here, 2 meet random ppl like me ^^… im 13 years old (im mature 4 my age tho!!) i like 2 watch invader zim w/ my girlfreind (im bi if u dont like it deal w/it) its our favorite tv show!!! bcuz its SOOOO random!!! shes random 2 of course but i want 2 meet more random ppl =) like they say the more the merrier!!! lol…neways i hope 2 make alot of freinds here so give me lots of commentses!!!
DOOOOOMMMM!!! <— me bein random again ^^ hehe…toodles!!!
gOS already has separate profiles with different passwords, how about setup a profile with a few pictures of gaping anuses to match the energy of nosy warrantless searching federals and install a couple apps with some activity I’m guessing is going to be better than an obvious wipe, even though a wipe is legal as it’s your property and not evidence of a crime to destroy your own stuff.
Lol I wouldn’t hold your breath, these devs won’t even give you inverted navbar buttons so unless it’s something they themselves want, you won’t see it.
Nope, and in the support threads the devs were all “Tough, we don’t want it, use gestures”.
Inverted navbar and long press back button to force close an app are essential for me. Meanwhile diva devs are a massive turn off.
Love some of what they’ve done, hate their attitude. Bit like the lemmy devs, except the GOS devs won’t allow anyone to fork or incorporate their stuff.
@modem_down@beep@Semi_Hemi_Demigod It would be trivially detected by widely distributed standard forensic software including the non-Premium variant of Cellebrite able to run on a laptop.
The point isn’t to make it forensically undetectable, but to prevent the room temperature IQ cop from noticing what happened. If they “unlock” the phone and don’t see anything that looks out of the ordinary they won’t make a big deal out of it and there’s a chance they’ll let you go.
It would be trivially detected by widely distributed standard forensic software including the non-Premium variant of Cellebrite able to run on a laptop.
By "duress profile", I mean that if user has enabled a "duress profile" feature in Settings, then entering the duress PIN would:
Erase (the encryption key for) all profiles and storage outside the duress profile; then
Unlock the duress profile.
So, how would forensic software detect that the unlocked profile is a duress profile?
Reading this comment with the assumption my wife will find it some day: Right, she doesn’t give out my number instead of hers as a contact point every time she visits a shop that asks, and certainly not because she has it memorised and it’s too much of a bother to give out her own, not at all.
All the WhatsApp group invitations for clothing and grocery places that happen after she goes shopping are completely unrelated.
That is more or less what the old TrueCrypt (and also VeraCrypt) systems did. One password gets you the real data, the other opens a different partition that could be stuffed with dummy data.
True privacy/security night involve a hybrid, where it opens the device to the fake partition+profile but also kills off internal keys to the real data when the duress is used
They make their own rules who they’re letting in. They can totally put him on a list so he’ll never get a visa for this stunt. No legal recourse. The country equivalent of the “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone “ sign
I can’t believe he has to wait until October for a determination on this. The facts of the case are clear. If nothing else I hope he sues the police department that put him on a watchlist for terrorism.
If he wins this case that would be my first move. The only reason he was harassed like this was because he voiced a negative opinion about a city project.
Tunick asked four times during the interrogation to speak with a lawyer, but was rebuffed each time, according to courtroom testimony. Additionally, the agents produced no warrant and did not read Tunick his rights.
If he’s not even accused of a crime, how is wiping his phone “destroying evidence”? What is the crime being committed here? You are allowed to wipe your own phone, and technically he didn’t even do that.
Furthermore, asking a suspect for their passcode is bargain basement police work. Being surprised when this doesn’t work seems pretty incompetent. I think they’re throwing the book at him because they fucked up.
No, they’re throwing the book at him to make a statement.
Their argument, which is stated in the article, is that since he was not in the US (you are not considered in the U.S. until you go through border protection, even if physically here), US rights and protections don’t apply.
Similarly, this isn’t destruction of evidence they are charged for. It is destruction of property to prevent seizure. Which is a bit awkward because that’s a law in the US, but he isn’t in the US yet…?
Of course, it’s all bullshit. We all know this, but this is going to set a very dangerous precedent if it sticks.
The argument is that the US government doesn’t have to follow US laws when interacting with US citizens outside of the US?
That’s especially dubious when “outside the US” is referring to a legally flimsy distinction like the international terminal of an airport which is on US soil and controlled exclusively by the US government.
There’s no way this isn’t going to be abused if allowed by courts.
And being “in the US” or not doesn’t have shit to do with it anyway. Yes, CBP gets some special powers at the border, like warrantless search, but whether you are before or after passport control does not determine whether or not you are subject to the laws of the US, with, again, the exception of the special powers granted CBP that do reduce some protections you would normally have.
I just read the article and the whole thing is fucking crazy
Tunick asked four times during the interrogation to speak with a lawyer, but was rebuffed each time, according to courtroom testimony. Additionally, the agents produced no warrant and did not read Tunick his rights.
What are the dumbasses gonna do? Sorry man we’re gonna arrest you on charges for phone restart. The fuck?
Besides the accusations of pedophilia? Are these people actually mental?
I’m not a US citizen but do you have any rights at a border checkpoint? I was under the impression that no warrant is necessary, nor lawyer required, to answer questions.
You have fewer rights at a border crossing for sure, but that doesn’t make it some sort of “constitution free zone”, mostly it means that they are allowed to conduct ‘routine’ searches and interviews without a warrant, and hold you for a certain amount of time, and deny you entry if they deem that necessary, all without a judge or warrant involved. How much protection you get from the 4th and 5th amendments is definitely different at the border than not at the border. But that does not mean you have zero rights at the border, they just want you to feel that way so you stay compliant.
Mental note: When traveling internationally, back up phone to cloud somewhere and wipe it prior to traveling. Step two, restore from cloud after exiting airport.
Hell, I don’t even have anything remotely questionable on my phone other than some Trump mocking memes, but there is absolutely no reason to chance it.
Step 1.5. Log into some email service that you only use for the purpose of travel (ie: forward your hotel reservation etc). Put some of your travel photos back on your phone.
That way it looks like you actually used the phone and didn’t wipe it before crossing.
You want a dummy account on it that just has the details of the flight in there so its not completely blank just useless to the border police but clearly not just blanked awaiting setup.
Still not an option because jurors are not supposed to know about jury nullification and lawyers are not allowed in any way shape or form to suggest it.
There is in fact a current case in the UK, which is the legal system that the US has based itself on, in regards to a lawyer insinuating jury nullification during their closing remarks. The lawyer is being held in contempt and is now awaiting their own trial for that.
That’s why it’s important to mention it as much as possible outside of court so potential jurors know it is an option and that they can ignore instructions for the better of the country. It’s why I mentioned it. I’m not a lawyer but I’m not going to say someone is guilty of a crime if the law is being abused. I’d rather let 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent suffer.
I don’t think you understand how much it is that jurors are not allowed to know about jury nullification. If it’s found out that they bring it up in the jury deliberations, or mention or even allude to it during the trial, they can be kicked off the jury immediately.
Get fucked, it’s enshrined in the U.S. constitution against unreasonable searches and seizures through the 4th ammendment. You are not obligated to incriminate yourself in anyway.
The right against self incriminating is the 5th amendment. And he’s being charged for destroying evidence, not for not providing it. But I love the spirit.
I believe they’re citing two different rights in the Bill of Rights. They mention the Fourth amendment which provides against unwarranted search and seizure and then as an addendum they allude to the fifth amendment which provides against self-incrimination.
the GuardianUS government targets Cop City protester over phone operating systemConcern over US effort to prosecute Sam Tunick, accused by authorities of wiping his phone using GrapheneOS
