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 ...
So you’re a fanboy also?
Good to know ya’ fanboy.
A warrant requires probable cause. This would require evidence. Again, if its in your mind (like a password) you cannot be compelled by law to divulge.
For the privilege to apply, however, the government must try to compel a person to make a “testimonial” statement that would tend to incriminate him or her. When a person has a valid privilege against self-incrimination, nobody — not even a judge — can force the witness to give that information to the government.
And as we all know, fingerprints do not fall under 5th amendment protection.
Lol, maybe so.
It’s not on an internal “drive” it’s in a firewalled section on the CPU. Further more, new I do states that hacking off somones finger won’t work either. It has to be alive with electronic biometric activity. The scanner reads more than the ridges and whorles.
“Not from where my finger usually is.”
:) What else is there to say?!
5 digits can be stored, and a passcode is still “required”.
Why cause the NSA doesn't have you fingerprints? Can you link to an article supporting your theory? I'm not trying to be a smart-a$$. I'm really curious. (Promise not to call you "fanboy")
During the Zimmerman trial, the prosecution argued that certain of Trayvon's texts were inadmissible, because it could not be proved that Trayvon sent them, as opposed to someone having access to his phone.
If your phone unlocks by fingerprint, and the phone maintains a log of access and whether it was by fingerprint or passcode, then a prosecutor could successfully argue that you, beyond shadow of doubt, were the person on the phone when a call/text/pic was made, as opposed to some other person working your phone without your knowledge.
:)
Sure. But probable cause is necessary for you to open your trunk or your pda as well - 'plain sight' rules apply. If you get pulled over on a traffic stop, there is no probable cause, and no warrant would hold up... Unless they found illicit drugs for instance (by plain sight), whereupon, while you are sitting in jail, a warrant will be issued to search your home your car, and probably electronic information services and devices.
Again, if its in your mind (like a password) you cannot be compelled by law to divulge.
Right, which is why I said that nothing incriminating should be kept on an electronic device, anymore than it should be kept on a piece of paper.
Apple, like many companies, uses data from your iPhone/iPad. Just how much Data they are logging, no one knows. And since Apple is a closed system, (as opposed to open source) you have to accept their word for it.
On that we agree. The rest is an open question, for now.
Which is all fine, but it does nothing to protect data, which is my point - one does not need a fingerprint to see what the unit holds, one only needs to peel out the internal storage.
and there is ALWAYS a back door. Corporate is going to be mighty miffed if a disgruntled employee can brick all their hardware, as will joe-sixpack when something goes wrong and his spendy new gizmo is boat-anchored. There is invariably a way to reset it, and if there isn't now, there will be.
So what?
The belief that stored information is unhackable by various government agencies, corporations, or the NSA, in this day and age, is inexcusably naive.
And anyone making such claims as industry experts with decades in the field should be doubly ashamed.
What Apple is doing is breaking operational ground in functional biometrics as a social meme. That’s it. This is just one giant leap towards the conceptual “666 forehead scanner” that everyone laughs about, but which TPTB are deadly serious about implementing.
Not to mention training an entier generation of idiots that biometric information formerly protect by warrant requirements are now necessarily waived by electronic contract agreements so as to get to the latest version of Angry Birds.
I promise not to call you a FANdroid either. So I guess we’re even.
Fingerprint sensors were a non issue when they started appearing on Windows Laptops just a few years ago. Apple’s fingerprint sensor is a non issue as well.
It might be quite a different situation altogether on Android devices though. Google has been known to steal info from its users (see wifi case in the US and EU). I could see scenarios where Google might take your fingerprint and sell it to an advertiser just to make an additional penny.
Apple Questioned Over iPhone Fingerprint Security By U.S. Senator Franken
not to worry- Weird Al is on the case.
He’s an expert .
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.