this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
457 points (98.9% liked)

Privacy

4371 readers
6 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] randompasta 91 points 6 months ago (3 children)

That's why passwords are safer in this situation. Cops can't compel you to reveal it.

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 65 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 47 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I miss when crypto nerd meant cryptography nerd

[–] lengau@midwest.social 21 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It still does. People who like cryptocurrency are crypto bros (regardless of gender).

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

?

They mean literal cryptography.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptography

Now, a lot of old crypto bros were the origins of crypto currency, but that's a different breed of nerd than the modern crypto bro. The difference is how much you like math and how many posters of Alan Turing you have.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't really know how you misunderstood his post in order to correct you, but I'll try.

He's saying crypto nerds like cryptography and crypto bros are cryptocurrency shills.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Ah, I see. The confusion happened because crypto nerd absolutely does not mean that to the casual public anymore, as bemoaned in the parent comment, and I didn't realize he was insisting there is still a distinction.

I really don't have a leg to stand on with that topic because I always put "libertarian" in scare quotes.

The thing is, however, that a lot of the crypto nerds are also crypto bros. Or at least, they're who the crypto bros were trying to be, the guys who were mining Bitcoin when it was worth $0.13, but those two people sound exactly alike on the Internet on their shared interest because they're both trying to sell you the coins.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago

cryptocurrency is applied cryptography, no reason you can't like both.

[–] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 62 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, unfortunately, this isn't a new thing, just upholding the old standard. I explicitly avoid fingerprint and face recognition features because of this. Your fingerprint and your face are legally considered what you are, so things like 5th amendment right to avoid self incrimination don't apply, but passwords and PINs are legally considered what you know, so you can't be forced to divulge.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 37 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The wrinkle in this case is that the thumb print giver was in parole. The conditions of parole stated that failure to divulge phone pass codes on phones could result in arrest and phone seizure "pending further investigation". The parole conditions didn't say anything about forcible thumb print taking.

So the logic here seems to be:

  • If he had agreed to unlock the phone then the result would be the same.
  • If he refused to unlock the phone, that is a legitimate grounds for arrest. Fingerprinting is a routine part of being arrested, so there's really no harm if it's done on a phone in a patrol car. Either way, the result would end up about the same.
[–] lengau@midwest.social 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that's even less than what the standard is. That's just saying "you have to do what's in the conditions of your parole, and we won't accept sneaky technicalities."

But I suppose "appeals court rules that you have to obey the terms of your parole" is far less ragebaity.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The real story here is how terms of parole are often ridiculous and contribute heavily to our high recidivism rate. Not to mention stripping away rights.

[–] thrawn@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Not arguing in favor of them, with how awful the police and oftentimes court systems are, I’m not surprised to hear parole ones are bad too. But what about them contribute to reoffending?

(I’m too lazy to check myself right now, and maybe the answer will help others too? Plus it might vary in jurisdictions)

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I wasn't referring to the parole officers per se, just the parole stipulations. For example, a common one is that you must be employed. But then you also must make your regularly scheduled meetings with your parole officer, which are scheduled during working hours. The parole board will determine your address (usually as a stipulation of release, usually with family) but the parole office will be on the other side of the city. Public transit is unreliable, if you miss your bus you go to prison.

I had a friend of a friend who was getting released to a halfway house. Never saw the light of day. When they released his clothes to him, that he got arrested in seven years previously, they found Marijuana seeds in the pockets. Not bud, seeds. That's a parole violation, instant back to prison for 3 more years, minimum. The parole officer who was there told me about it (was also the officer of my friend, who I was giving a ride to).

[–] AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Any time a cop has the legal authority to access the contents of your phone, you can be compelled to provide your fingerprint or face to unlock it if that will work. If your phone doesn't have those features enabled and relies on a PIN, they can't force you to tell them that outside of some unusual circumstances like parole obligations because you agree to those. They can still access your phone, but only to the extent that they can without the PIN. In this case, cops had the required authority because of his parole obligations, but they'd be equally able to force you to unlock by fingerprint or face if they got your phone as part of a search warrant and I think if you're arrested but only if your phone is relevant evidence. Maybe even if it's not, but I'm less sure about that.

[–] Albbi@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 months ago

I just have lockdown mode enabled from the power menu so that it forces pass code login instead of allow fingerprint login.

Never been pulled over or talked to a cop (other than family members) in my life.

[–] Wistful@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You can use the lockdown mode on Android, but you have to remember to turn it on.

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 23 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Android: Search settings for “Lockdown” and enable “Show lockdown option”

When needed hold the power button and the lockdown option will appear alongside the standard power menu options.

IOS: Hold the Lock button and either volume button to show the power off screen. Cancel out and FaceID will be disabled until you use your pin to unlock the phone.

[–] Bahalex@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

You can also spam the power button on IOS. It should pop up the same menu as holding the power button. You can cancel, but it requires a password to get back into the phone.

[–] irish_link@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Not sure about Android but IOS you can actually use FaceID for all the things you want like password managers, log into PayPal, and other biometric features but have it disabled to unlock the phone. It’s what I do, you don’t need to spam anything. Just use a pin to unlock.

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

I didn’t know that!

Cool!

[–] alilbee@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I did not know about this feature. Thank you!

[–] TheBest@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago