←back to thread

511 points moonsword | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
Shank ◴[] No.42170993[source]
To me the biggest takeaway is that Apple is sufficiently paranoid to add this feature. Some people (like John Gruber) advocate for activating bio lockout at the border by squeezing the volume and power buttons. I would say if you’re the type of person who would do this, you should go one step further and power off.

Similarly, if you’re in a situation where you cannot guarantee your phone’s security because it’s leaving your possession, and you’re sufficiently worried, again, power off fully.

replies(6): >>42171295 #>>42171375 #>>42171383 #>>42171541 #>>42172129 #>>42173509 #
phinnaeus ◴[] No.42171295[source]
What do you do if you’re at the border and they demand both the physical device and the password?

Let’s assume “get back on the plane and leave” is not a viable option.

replies(7): >>42171300 #>>42171336 #>>42171441 #>>42171689 #>>42172174 #>>42172240 #>>42172539 #
cherryteastain ◴[] No.42171336[source]
GrapheneOS duress password [1] and user profiles [2] are quite solid solutions for this scenario

[1] https://grapheneos.org/features#duress

[2] https://grapheneos.org/features#improved-user-profiles

replies(1): >>42171723 #
andyjohnson0 ◴[] No.42171723[source]
From the link:

> GrapheneOS provides users with the ability to set a duress PIN/Password that will irreversibly wipe the device (along with any installed eSIMs) once entered anywhere where the device credentials are requested (on the lockscreen, along with any such prompt in the OS).

In a border interrogation scenario, isn't that just likely to get you arrested for destroying evidence?

replies(1): >>42172146 #
verandaguy ◴[] No.42172146[source]
Depends on the border. In most democracies, and at most borders, and in most LE cases, there is a line between “destruction of my own property/data” and “destruction of evidence,” where the latter usually needs a court document notifying the subject of the potential charge of their requirement to preserve evidence (for example, a subpoena, or in some cases, a direct request to avoid spoliation).
replies(1): >>42173663 #
myflash13 ◴[] No.42173663[source]
Theory. This is not how things work in practice, even in "democracies". Speaking as a person who has been harassed at the US border from Canada many times, I've learned it depends more on how the border agent "feels" about you. These people are often uneducated bullies who don't know or don't care about the law anyway. And if you start objecting on some legal basis, they can legally make things a LOT harder for you, including simply denying entry for no reason (yes, they have such a right). Better to cooperate rather than give the appearance of "destroying evidence" (even if completely legal) or you're in for a world of hurt if you got the wrong guy.
replies(2): >>42174899 #>>42175199 #
1. seanw444 ◴[] No.42175199[source]
I have a solution to that problem that works 100% of the time:

I don't leave the US.

replies(1): >>42176073 #
2. iAMkenough ◴[] No.42176073[source]
2 out of 3 people in the US live within U.S. Customs and Border Protection jurisdiction, where border agents can search without warrant if they determine they have "reasonable suspicion."

Additionally, SCOTUS ruled in 2022 (Egbert v Boule) that someone who has had their Fourth Amendment rights violated by CBP agents are not entitled to any damages unless Congress clearly defines a punishment for the violation by a federal agent.

replies(1): >>42177259 #
3. seanw444 ◴[] No.42177259[source]
True, that's ridiculous. But luckily I am one of the 1 out of 3.