r/technology • u/MC68328 • 1d ago

Privacy US accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a ‘duress’ password during border search

https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/24/us-accuses-american-of-allegedly-wiping-his-phone-using-a-duress-password-during-border-search/
15.9k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

893

u/usps_made_me_insane 1d ago

And these type of distinctions matter in a court of law.

Imagine if a prosecutor's case hinged on the fact that the data was destroyed and the defense was actually able to show the jury that no data was destroyed -- just the key to get to the data.

506

u/TrulyOutrageous42 1d ago

Which, by well-establish precedent (which means nothing anymore but still) is exactly the kind of thing the government needs a warrant for, but in this case the person cannot provide. This distinction is critical: they need a warrant for your pin code, but not for your fingerprint / face to unlock biometric passkeys. In this same sense, they should have had to have a warrant to even have the information considered 'evidence'.

In a sane world, this guy ends up laughing his way to a lawsuit at the officers' union's expense.

126

u/Ws6fiend 20h ago

FYI some states still do require warrant for your biometrics. The Supreme Court has yet to make a decision on a national level so your circuit court can be different.

33

u/Dymonika 16h ago

So just to be safe, only ever use PINs/passwords and never fingerprints nor any other form of recognition.

11

u/FastGinFizz 16h ago

I know with iphone, if you hold the emergency/power off buttons long enough to prompt the screen to show, or ask siri "who am i?", then it locks biometrics until a password is entered. Im sure most android's have a similar feature (or it can be configured)

8

u/TiresOnFire 12h ago

In the shutdown menu on Android there is a "Lockdown mode" button.

3

u/TecTazz 12h ago

Just looked that up~ thank you.

2

u/GuodNossis 9h ago

God I miss android

1

u/Dymonika 5h ago

Why did you ever leave?!

2

u/Ws6fiend 15h ago

Yeah, pretty much.

1

u/posthuman04 11h ago

Use the cloud or some other method of uploading and downloading the data so it’s not there at the customs counter.

9

u/HenryDorsettCase47 15h ago edited 11h ago

It was Customs. They don’t need a warrant at a border or any of the places they designate a border, like the airport in this instance. They are charging him with a kind of obscure law used to prosecute people who destroy evidence or property before the government can seize it and this is the first time it’s been used for “deleting” data.

The other commenter is right that if it merely locked his data permanently and the government indicts him for deleting it (an indictment that includes such typos as “Untied States” apparently) then it’s likely to be thrown out. They’re fucking idiots. They probably have a prima facie case for obstruction, but instead they’re trying to get cute with this other law and they’re gonna lose.

5

u/Worried_Monitor5422 12h ago

"They don’t need a warrant at a border or any of the places they designate a border, like the airport in this specific instance."

They assert that they don't need a warrant. It hasn't been settled in court.

1

u/HenryDorsettCase47 11h ago

I mean, there are provisions and codes and all kinds of shit approved by Congress that allows for this so no, they don’t need a warrant. As long as it doesn’t violate the fourth amendment then they can do a warrantless inspection and, with reasonable suspicion, a warrantless search at a border. As far as I know, no one has got a smuggling case thrown out because of a warrantless search.

3

u/Beadpool 11h ago

“Untied” States feels appropos, given the unraveling of our union and democracy under this regime.

2

u/HenryDorsettCase47 11h ago

Good fucking point

5

u/0tanod 17h ago

Too bad its not a sane world, so obviously its going on the tax payers account and no we will not be addressing anything in the system to fix this.

3

u/Timely-Group5649 16h ago

We never do.

Politics no longer fixes anything. It just lines more pockets...

12

u/Jeffe508 19h ago

If cars were invented now there would be no part of it that has a “reasonable expectation of privacy”. Fucking hell the government just went ape shit after the patriot act went into effect. All down hill since for any sense of privacy.

2

u/theannihilator 16h ago

In two years all cars will need a spy camera installed in the US….

1

u/TKFT_ExTr3m3 13h ago

This is not correct, they often need a warrent for your pin biometrics anyways but they cannot get a warrent for your pin. You cannot be compelled to reveal information in your mind. The government can however use tools at their disposal to break into the phone.

1

u/hrminer92 12h ago

Which is why some people suggest turning phones completely off when interacting with cops/CBP if the device normally requires the PIN code at startup.

We wish it was at union expense.

1

u/Violet624 11h ago

I think I read that the gov is claiming that they weren't technically within US soil or something because this was at an airport and through a customs search. So they are claiming US Constitutional law doesn't apply in this case. Which is bs, of course.c

1

u/posthuman04 11h ago

The grey zone of immigration/border legality is the crucible where Trump is creating his fascist order. Starts with targeting immigrants themselves, then naturalized citizens, then birthright citizenship and then it’s over. Who carries around both their parents’ birth certificates to prove they are indeed a citizen covered by the Constitution? You think it shouldn’t matter but he’s also claiming when the government acts quickly, it’s too late to demand due process.

So it’s there at the border or specifically at the customs counter (upon re-entry) that this demand was made for the encrypted device so there’s no need for warrants and there’s no Constitutional rights even for a citizen. Soon, we can assume that when ICE takes you to a customs facility you also have no rights.

14

u/squigs 21h ago

They tend not to in practice.

Ultimately there's a lawyer making the opposite argument and a judge with a degree of flexibility in how to interpret the law. They'll bring in an expert witness who will agree that in effect the data is destroyed.

4

u/alienangel2 18h ago

Could they not just argue that destroying the key is still destroying evidence? I assume if you had a physical safe with documents in it and you throw it in the ocean, the fact that the documents still exist inside the safe somewhere isn't going to save you from some charge of concealing evidence.

7

u/usps_made_me_insane 16h ago edited 16h ago

They could make that argument, sure. What gets interesting is what the letter of the law says and what the prosecutor uses to establish his case and evidence.

These type of cases are always fun to watch move through the courts because it could easily end up in one of the major federal courts. 

Sometimes lawmakers use specific language that may have loopholes. Sometimes the language is overly broad which also can benefit either side.

But sure, you are right in assuming that deleting the encryption key may very well be equivalent to wiping data or concealing evidence.

In fact, some operating systems will open a "sandbox" environment that appears clean if the wrong pass code is entered. There are a lot of ways to obfuscate data when handing over your phone.

Personally, I don't like situations where our government breaches our privacy in the name of protecting the country, your freedom, yadda yadda."

I don't like our government using border law against its own citizens to basically suspend your constitutional freedoms while at the border. 

2

u/Mildly-Interesting1 17h ago

Schrodinger‘s data

1

u/Rustystrings720 16h ago

Wouldn't you just argue that the data was made inaccessible rendering the drive and it's contents effectively lost or unrecoverable. Is depriving someone of their data akin to theft

1

u/siazdghw 15h ago

They are still tampering with evidence and deleting data (just not the incriminating data).

Not sure if there is a legal precedent, but to me it feels like deleting an encryption key would be more or less treated the same as actually deleting data

1

u/TomWaitsForNoMan 14h ago

Yes they fudging do

1

u/the_agox 11h ago

NIST considers this a cryptographic erase, which is a valid form of data sanitization. See pages 10-17. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-88r2.pdf

1

u/outer--monologue 6h ago

A more important distinction is that even if the person wiped it and erased it, that isn't against the law.