Posted on 09/14/2013 12:43:55 PM PDT by quimby
Considering the nationwide panic regarding security and privacy, both offline and online, Apple’s new Touch ID system was met with some cynicism. Where is the fingerprint data going to be stored? What happens if someone obtains the data? Would a criminal be willing to remove my finger in order to access my contact list? Some concerns were admittedly a bit more hypothetical than others, but Marcia Hofmann’s piece on Wired brings up a legal situation which is far more likely to cause problems for an iPhone owner than the theoretical digit thief.
The Fifth Amendment provides the right against self-incrimination in a court of law. A judge may not require the defendant to incriminate him or herself with any information that is testimonial, or as Hofmann puts it, “reveals the contents of your mind.” That would include, say, the four-digit code to unlock your iPhone 5, but if access to your iPhone 5s depends on your fingerprint, that could be seen as physical evidence.
Hofmann provides a classic example that illustrates a similar case.
“Take this hypothetical example coined by the Supreme Court: If the police demand that you give them the key to a lockbox that happens to contain incriminating evidence, turning over the key wouldn’t be testimonial if it’s just a physical act that doesn’t reveal anything you know,” Hoffman wrote. “However, if the police try to force you to divulge the combination to a wall safe, your response would reveal the contents of your mind — and so would implicate the Fifth Amendment.”
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I do apologise. I thought the legal aspects were interesting. Nothing personal, just thinking out loud.
Bingo !!
All of this technology BS is getting to the point of no return. Once you start using things like your fingerprint to access a communication device that can be scanned remotely, you no longer have security.
Apple won't use nfc. This is their route, at least thats what i've read.
I was joking, but trust me, the dems would pull out the stops to somehow use this tech to make dem votes.
I actually thought you were advocating fingerprint voting. sounds like a good idea.
The criminals will start hacking off the arms of iPhone owners when they steal them.
In Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, the gangs are not beyond hacking off an arm to steal a watch. A cheap, inexpensive watch at that.
Google “Kips Kaboni” and “Raskols” - they will literally rob you for the shirt on your back and even your underwear.
I understand the intent - not that I believe the machine is truly a brick by the way... There is always a way to circumvent the technology... ALWAYS.
For instance, I just woke up a bricked notebook, and it was truly an art to get it done - Way more white papers and way more forum reading than the box was ever worth... but now that I know how, I know how.
But that aside, the OP was definitely leading one to the idea that the cops could *make* you hand over data by forcing you to print the box, where they cannot force you to divulge the pwd. My statement went toward the idea that it is a moot point, because the data can be discovered by other means anyway... Like circumventing the fingerprint reader by removing the internal storage and accessing directly.
Such tech might keep a snoopy neighbor or wife out of your junk, but it isn't going to be kept away from a halfway decent hacker with his hands on the machine.
Take this hypothetical example coined by the Supreme Court: If the police demand that you give them the key to a lockbox that happens to contain incriminating evidence, turning over the key wouldn’t be testimonial if it’s just a physical act that doesn’t reveal anything you know.
However, if the police try to force you to divulge the combination to a wall safe, your response would reveal the contents of your mind — and so would implicate the Fifth Amendment. (If you’ve written down the combination on a piece of paper and the police demand that you give it to them, that may be a different story.)
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/09/the-unexpected-result-of-fingerprint-authentication-that-you-cant-take-the-fifth/
right - I get it. The fingerprint is an action, therefore considered as a key, whereas the pwd is a thought, and therefore treated the same as the combination to a lock. They can *make you* print the box. They cannot make you divulge a password.
So what about my thought below doesn't jibe with that?
But that aside, the OP was definitely leading one to the idea that the cops could *make* you hand over data by forcing you to print the box, where they cannot force you to divulge the pwd. My statement went toward the idea that it is a moot point, because the data can be discovered by other means anyway... Like circumventing the fingerprint reader by removing the internal storage and accessing directly.
Unfortunately for the robber, the iPhone 5s will not be the only thing in my pocket.
No. It does not.
The Fifth Amendment does not provide any right.
Our rights do not come from a piece of paper.
Our rights are birthrights, divinely bestowed.
The Fifth Amendment merely prohibits the government from requiring a citizen to be a witness against himself.
Quimby calls anybody who remotely supports Apple products “fanboy”.
Ok, back to the case of the safe. The safe can be opened by several means, a safe cracker or a cutting torch. Does the law allow that? Apparently not according to the law as interpreted by the courts. So, no its not a moot point.
The decided cases control the acts of the police. Again, its all conjecture at this point. But the concept is intriguing. And no one can say for sure what the courts might decide.
One reason that I never had my ears pierced for earrings.
Just repeating a widely used term. Not my invention.
From the register:
Surely nobody – not even the most avid fanboi – now believes that Jobs left "four years of new products" in the pipeline, as his biographer Walter Isaacson reported in 2011. Assuming Isaacson was inspecting Apple's lab in 2010, the first "three years" will soon be up. Which raises the question: is anything left?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/12/apple_samsung_iphone_zzz/
Your points are well taken.
Bless Your Heart
1. fanboi
Someone who is hopelessly devoted to something and will like anything associated with thier particular thing.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fanboi
I actually like some apple products. I run OSX on my "hackintosh" dell machine.
No, the law does allow it with a warrant. It is just like the trunk of your car. Not 'plain sight', and you can deny access. But with a warrant, the cop can force you to hand over the key, or can do whatever damage necessary to break in (at your expense for the damage to property).
There is PLENTY of case law for forensic forays into electronic gear with a warrant.
Don’t trust the liberal government media propagandists. The NSA is upset big time about this. Apple decided not to transmit any finger print data over the internet and they’re not storing it on any servers either. The sensor is not even available to developers to use in their apps. The finger print does not get sent to any body at any time. What that means is Apple is not playing ball with corporate and government entities that want to own both you and your data.
Hence the blowback from liberal media sources and associated blogs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.