Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Texas court says police can't search your phone

... pursuant to an arrest. The police would need to get a wa kmc66602/28/14
Meanwhile, password protect your phone. This creates a "forc eddiemunster02/28/14
There's a lot of tech that I've tried to do without or be a superttthero02/28/14
It's not about cracking it (NSA's already been there & done eddiemunster03/01/14
It's sad they even have to spell this out. Fuck the polic sillydood02/28/14
In my jx, the phone can be searched. Criminal appellate vanity03/02/14
I hope the Supreme Court decides something akin to this beca adamb02/28/14
Unless you are legally compelled to give up the password and eddiemunster03/01/14
Don't get me started on cameras. NY keeps putting them up e adamb03/01/14
Only law breakers have something to worry about, comrade. allordpwnsu03/01/14
With so many new regulations every day, we're all lawbreaker 123fakestreet03/02/14
Sounds like something a lawbreaker would say. allordpwnsu03/02/14
Regulations equals jobs. I’m in favor of job creation. Not esquirewalletsmatter06/09/18
kmc666 (Feb 28, 2014 - 12:16 pm)

... pursuant to an arrest. The police would need to get a warrant to search the phone. The court says we have an expectation of privacy for the stuff on our phones. Let's see of this reasoning will spread to the rest of the country.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/texas-appeals-court-says-police-cant-search-your-phone-after-youre-jailed/

Reply Like (0)
eddiemunster (Feb 28, 2014 - 12:30 pm)

Meanwhile, password protect your phone. This creates a "forced confession" defense if ever you're in the situation where cops want to see what's in there. The fingerprint thing on the new iPhones is convenient but not nearly as good, legally, since compelling you to give a fingerprint is something they can already do at the time of arrest.

Reply Like (0)
superttthero (Feb 28, 2014 - 2:01 pm)

There's a lot of tech that I've tried to do without or be a late adopter that eventually I get sucked into because times change (no physical phone keyboard for one).

The finger print thing... that's not something I could ever envision needing. I would hate to have to go to settings and turn it off everyone time someone borrows my phone. I can see a lot of scenarios where my phone is someone and someone needs access and the password makes it more flexible.

Really though, the way I see it, if someone can crack my 6 key password, they're probably savvy enough to crack the thumbprint thing.

Reply Like (0)
eddiemunster (Mar 1, 2014 - 12:25 am)

It's not about cracking it (NSA's already been there & done that by the time you read this), it's about what the police would be legally allowed to do after an arrest. Making you offer up a fingerprint is something the court already says they can do, while forcing you to cough up a password is a different animal altogether. That's the EFF's view on it, anyway.

Reply Like (0)
sillydood (Feb 28, 2014 - 2:32 pm)

It's sad they even have to spell this out.

Fuck the police. Fuck the war on drugs.

Reply Like (0)
vanity (Mar 2, 2014 - 8:27 pm)

In my jx, the phone can be searched.

Criminal appellate law = whatever we can do to put these folks in jail.

Reply Like (0)
adamb (Feb 28, 2014 - 5:16 pm)

I hope the Supreme Court decides something akin to this because in a society that is more reliant on computers and phone-sized computers, it would be a big problem if the police access the information rather freely without any restrictions.

I wonder what would happen if people have one of those programs that erases all of the data on the phone if someone gets the password wrong a certain number of times or if the password system is cracked/bypassed. Is that destruction of evidence? Is the owner of the phone responsible if the police trigger something that erases the data, which contains material evidence?

Reply Like (0)
eddiemunster (Mar 1, 2014 - 12:28 am)

Unless you are legally compelled to give up the password and refuse to do so, it's not your fault if they confiscate your stuff then break it in the process of trying to exploit it. I agree though, this and cameras are two areas where the Supreme Court needs to reach down, grab a case and decide one way or another what the law is - it's not well settled at all.

Reply Like (0)
adamb (Mar 1, 2014 - 8:39 am)

Don't get me started on cameras. NY keeps putting them up everywhere, and they are linked to a central database that reads license plates, collects data for "anti-terrorism" purposes, and now they want to have cameras that give automatic speeding tickets. It seems not to matter if we have democrats or republicans or "independents" in office, they just keep putting up cameras. The judicial branch is the best branch of government for curbing this abusive surveillance.

Reply Like (0)
allordpwnsu (Mar 1, 2014 - 8:03 pm)

Only law breakers have something to worry about, comrade.

Reply Like (0)
123fakestreet (Mar 2, 2014 - 9:35 pm)

With so many new regulations every day, we're all lawbreakers whether we know it or not.

Reply Like (0)
allordpwnsu (Mar 2, 2014 - 10:14 pm)

Sounds like something a lawbreaker would say.

Reply Like (0)
esquirewalletsmatter (Jun 9, 2018 - 9:19 am)

Regulations equals jobs. I’m in favor of job creation. Not the private prison industry complex though. That should be abolished.

Reply Like (0)
Post a message in this thread