If you're new to AirPods, considering buying a pair, or just want to pick up some new tips.
AirPods and AirPower: Everything We Know
First Case Surfaces of Law Enforcement Forcing Suspect to Unlock iPhone With Face ID
A Forbes report has highlighted the first known case of law enforcement forcing a suspect to unlock an iPhone using Face ID.
The incident reportedly happened in August when federal agents obtained a warrant to search the house of a man in Columbus, Ohio, as part of a child abuse investigation.
Apple marketing image for Face ID
According to case documents, FBI agents got 28-year-old Grant Michalski to put his face in front of his iPhone X to activate the Face ID facial authentication.
After the device was unlocked, investigators looked through Michalski's chat history, photos, and other files stored on the phone. Evidence discovered on the device was used to charge the suspect later that month with receiving and possessing child pornography.
Several previous cases have occurred where law enforcement has gained access to digital data by forcing people to unlock mobile devices using their fingers. One case even reportedly involved trying to use the finger of a dead person to unlock a phone, which ultimately didn't work.
However, this appears to be the first case in which Face ID has been used, so it's likely to reignite debate over where the law stands in relation to biometric authentication methods.
In the United States, forcing someone to give up a password is interpreted as self-incrimination, which is protected by the fifth amendment and against the law. Nevertheless, courts have ruled that there's a difference between a biometric recognition system like Touch ID and a passcode that you type into your phone.
In the case highlighted by Forbes, the FBI was eventually locked out of the phone and had to gain a second search warrant to allow them to conduct a more thorough search of the device using a third-party unlocking solution, likely similar to Grayshift.
Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
The incident reportedly happened in August when federal agents obtained a warrant to search the house of a man in Columbus, Ohio, as part of a child abuse investigation.
According to case documents, FBI agents got 28-year-old Grant Michalski to put his face in front of his iPhone X to activate the Face ID facial authentication.
After the device was unlocked, investigators looked through Michalski's chat history, photos, and other files stored on the phone. Evidence discovered on the device was used to charge the suspect later that month with receiving and possessing child pornography.
Several previous cases have occurred where law enforcement has gained access to digital data by forcing people to unlock mobile devices using their fingers. One case even reportedly involved trying to use the finger of a dead person to unlock a phone, which ultimately didn't work.
However, this appears to be the first case in which Face ID has been used, so it's likely to reignite debate over where the law stands in relation to biometric authentication methods.
In the United States, forcing someone to give up a password is interpreted as self-incrimination, which is protected by the fifth amendment and against the law. Nevertheless, courts have ruled that there's a difference between a biometric recognition system like Touch ID and a passcode that you type into your phone.
In the case highlighted by Forbes, the FBI was eventually locked out of the phone and had to gain a second search warrant to allow them to conduct a more thorough search of the device using a third-party unlocking solution, likely similar to Grayshift.
Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
[ 163 comments ]
Top Rated Comments
(View all)
20 weeks ago
I just don't understand how moral stuff works in America. If with a warrant to search a house one is forced to let the police in, eventually things might be seized, why someone letting the police in a phone should be any different? Phones, computer or whatever. A judge warrant is a warrant.
The issue is the 5th amendment in the bill of rights, which basically says you can't be forced to testify against yourself. (That includes providing password to your devices and/or accounts) Just because someone has a warrant to search your house for physical evidence, doesn't mean they have a warrant to search you brain for thoughts and memories.
Take for example an off-shore bank account. With a search warrant for your house, they can't put you in front of your computer and force you to log into your bank's website. Instead they would also need to get a warrant for the bank and get your records that way. (although, depending on the country, the bank isn't required to comply)
However, now that our physical bodies are our passwords (fingers/faces), it is an area of the law that should be defined better. Is forcing someone to look into their Face ID camera or put their finger on a Touch ID scanner considered forcing them to testify against themselves? If so, and I believe it is, it is unconstitutional.
20 weeks ago
If with a warrant to search a house one is forced to let the police in, eventually things might be seized, why someone letting the police in a phone should be any different? Phones, computer or whatever. A judge warrant is a warrant.
This context is not about privacy.
Privacy would be some company or individual having access to your private data without your consent (or not under a judge warrant).
If America starts to distrust its judiciary system and taking privacy, protection (guns etc) to its own hands (including "hiring" private companies like Apple) because the system is failing, the fabric of democracy .... dark and hot ages ahead I predict.
I repeat, this is not about privacy.
This context is not about privacy.
Privacy would be some company or individual having access to your private data without your consent (or not under a judge warrant).
If America starts to distrust its judiciary system and taking privacy, protection (guns etc) to its own hands (including "hiring" private companies like Apple) because the system is failing, the fabric of democracy .... dark and hot ages ahead I predict.
I repeat, this is not about privacy.
20 weeks ago
Huh ? How's even possible for such a rule to exist ? We're talking about two different methods to access the same device/information. Under which logic only one of the two methods is protected by law against self-incrimination and not the other ? So, if one uses passcode is entitled to deny to unlock his/her device but in any other case government has the right to demand to a person to self-incriminate ?
You can’t hide your fingerprint/face. Therefore it is not covered under the fifth amendment. Passcodes have to be pulled from memory, which violates fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination. It’s why you have 5-click biometric unlock bypass in iOS now. Five clicks of the power button and a passcode must be entered. Said passcode is protected by fifth amendment privileges.
20 weeks ago
If the cops only asked and he cooperated, then I’m not sure how this is even newsworthy.
Anyone can ask anything they want.
Anyone can ask anything they want.
20 weeks ago
If you have the setting "Require Attention for Face ID" on, then you have to have your eyes properly open to unlock the phone. With that setting on I find that it will stay locked if I look at it by squinting.
20 weeks ago
I'm far more worried about criminals getting into my phone to harvest passwords and accounts info than I am about law enforcement getting in.
20 weeks ago
Privacy is a thing of the past, unfortunately.
Big tech and government seem to go hand in hand.
Big tech and government seem to go hand in hand.
20 weeks ago
Michalski is said to have cooperated
Do the moderators not know the definition of forced?
20 weeks ago
Basically this is why you shouldn't ever use Face ID or Touch ID or Windows Hello or anything like that if you care about security (and also why all the governments are so happy about these new "security" measures)
If you just have a strong password, it will take the government quite a bit of effort to crack it, interrogations etc, which obviously will require a lot of permissions and pushing the law.
On the other hand, forcing you to place your finger on a scanner? Or scanning your face? That hardly takes anything and it's pretty hard to argue against your rights being violated since there were no force or interrogation techniques applied.
If you just have a strong password, it will take the government quite a bit of effort to crack it, interrogations etc, which obviously will require a lot of permissions and pushing the law.
On the other hand, forcing you to place your finger on a scanner? Or scanning your face? That hardly takes anything and it's pretty hard to argue against your rights being violated since there were no force or interrogation techniques applied.
[ Read All Comments ]
Twitter today launched its Twitter Prototype Program and is accepting applications from people who want to beta test new Twitter features on iOS devices. Twitter's tests will be done through a...
Shazam, the song discovery app that's now owned by Apple, received a minor bug fix update last week, which, according to AppFigures, removes all third-party SDKs.
Shazam for iOS is no longer...
As of February 27, 2019, Apple is requiring that all Developer accounts with an Account Holder role be secured with two-factor authentication in order to ensure that only the account owner is able to...
Apple today seeded the third beta of an upcoming tvOS 12.2 update to its public beta testing group, one day after providing the beta to developers and a week after releasing the second tvOS 12.2...
Apple today released a new update for Safari Technology Preview, the experimental browser Apple first introduced three years ago in March 2016. Apple designed the Safari Technology Preview to test...
Satechi has offered a few options for iMac stands over the past few years, allowing customers a chance to elevate their iMac for a more ergonomic workspace, and gain access to a limited number of...
British audio equipment maker Bowers & Wilkins is expected to release its first AirPlay 2-enabled receivers in the near future.
A pair of new Bowers & Wilkins receivers named...
Google's "Keep" app for taking notes and making lists today expanded to the Apple Watch, allowing the app's users to use the note taking and list making functionality right on their...
