this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
363 points (99.2% liked)

Privacy

45131 readers
610 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The recent federal raid on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson isn’t merely an attack by the Trump administration on the free press. It’s also a warning to anyone with a smartphone.

Included in the search and seizure warrant for the raid on Natanson’s home is a section titled “Biometric Unlock,” which explicitly authorized law enforcement personnel to obtain Natanson’s phone and both hold the device in front of her face and to forcibly use her fingers to unlock it. In other words, a judge gave the FBI permission to attempt to bypass biometrics: the convenient shortcuts that let you unlock your phone by scanning your fingerprint or face.-

It is not clear if Natanson used biometric authentication on her devices, or if the law enforcement personnel attempted to use her face or fingers to unlock her devices. Natanson and the Washington Post did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The FBI declined to comment.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JoeMontayna@lemmy.ml 11 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The only safe phone is a phone with a strong password thats in a powered down state. Otherwise there are tools to gain full access.

[–] lavander@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

The only safe phone is a phone with no data.

Otherwise there will be tools to gain full access.

Without forgetting the good old rubber hose attach

FWIW I think the only way to keep confidential information is hosted in another country, encrypted, with no credentials (or even the name of the server) cached, all on open sources stacks, with the infrastructure provider different from the operating system provider different from the application provider and encryption provider

Is this convenient? No Is this accessible to the average user? No

I just think something at certain point went extremely wrong in history. We accepted control in exchange of convenience

[–] ShrimpCurler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

We accepted control at expense of convenience

I would have thought it would be more accurate to say we accepted convenience at the expense of privacy and security...

[–] lavander@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Yes, of course, it was a mistake, I reworded that sentece

[–] eagerbargain3@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

Just also stop saving critical stuff on your phone you’ll never use nor open again. A good mailbox is an empty mailbox, empty signal chat and so on. With AI it is leaking any away possibly out your phone

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

For my apps, I use biometric unlocks. To get in passed the lock screen to get onto my phone's home screen, I have to enter a pattern. I figure that if they're already passed the pattern, more pattern won't stop any unauthorized user. So, it really isn't worth the inconvenience to enter the pattern for all my apps (like banking, cc, investments, etc.) over and over. But, if they can't figure out my pattern after so many tries, my phone auto-erases.

[–] LeviReid@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 hours ago

phone auto-erases.

i'm WAAAY too clumsy and forgetful to have auto-erase on!

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 23 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Another thing for an overhauled Constitution. One's body and devices should be considered to be papers and effects.

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 18 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

that's precisely why i never stopped using a password to access my phone.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

You actually type “hunter2” in every time you want to unlock?

[–] Jack_Burton@lemmy.ca 1 points 30 minutes ago

Why did you type *******? You could just type a made up pass to use as the example, like "hunter2"

[–] Texas_Hangover@lemmy.radio 3 points 4 hours ago

These days it has to be something like 1Hunt3r2!l} because enhanced security.

[–] giraffes@kbin.earth 3 points 9 hours ago (6 children)

Instead of using your face or fingerprint to unlock it they could demand that you just type the password, could they not?

[–] discocactus@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

"I don't recall."

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 9 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Good question. In the U.S. It violates your fifth amendment right not to testify against yourself/self-incriminate... unless a person doesn't know that and voluntarily unlocks it.

[–] Netux 6 points 8 hours ago

From a legal perspective, no. Passwords would be a 5th amendment issue.

Nope, believe it or not, that's treated entirely differently. Considered to be covered by the 5th amendment since you would be required to provide information that could be self-incriminating.

[–] Scirocco@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

No.

There is no search warrant for the contents of your mind.

Of course "rubber hose decrypt" is always an option, but we're not quite there yet.

[–] Marasenna@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 4 hours ago

Of course “rubber hose decrypt” is always an option, but we’re not quite there yet.

I really think we are.

[–] JustinTheGM@ttrpg.network 3 points 9 hours ago
[–] Slowy@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago

I believe it gets a bit trickier because you can use your right to remain silent? They also can’t physically force you to speak the password but they can restrain you and unlock your phone by force.

[–] termaxima@slrpnk.net 42 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

Use GrapheneOS so you can "unlock" your phone and enter the wipe code instead.

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 2 points 4 hours ago

You don't have to give them your password, and GrapheneOS has a convenient feature to turn off biometric unlock for only unlocking the phone, but still lets you use it in apps

[–] pemptago@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago

Wasn't there a legal dispute around this that was trying to get them with tampering/destruction of evidence? Not sure if it's foolproof.

If you do use GrapheneOS, quickly restarting the device means your pin is required before biometrics unlock is available. As I understand it -- in the U.S. -- law enforcement can legally compel you to unlock your phone with biometrics, but not a pin. Not that you can trust law enforcement to be law abiding, but at least it's a stronger case in court.

[–] this@sh.itjust.works 36 points 15 hours ago (12 children)

Even better, set it to 1234567890 or 00000000 or similar easy to guess pin, and change it to the length of your actual pin, now if someone tries to bruteforce your phone it will instantly wipe and you can make a case that it was the law enforcement who destroyed any "evidence" by their own actions if in comes up In court.

[–] davetortoise@reddthat.com 28 points 15 hours ago (5 children)

This sounds like a convenient way to have all your locally saved photos wiped by your kid

[–] discocactus@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

In this economy??!

[–] FirstCircle@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 hours ago

You mean you're not having your photos automatically, immediately encrypted and backed up on remote servers? ente.io will do that for you and their free plan comes with 10G of storage which is quite a few pics.

[–] this@sh.itjust.works 18 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Always back up anything you don't want to loose.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 59 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

hold the device in front of her face and to forcibly use her fingers to unlock it. In other words, a judge gave the FBI permission to attempt to bypass biometrics

This isn't bypassing biometrics. This is using biometrics as intended. Bypassing implies this was an unexpected side effect when every security researcher ever has warned that biometrics is intrinsically vulnerable and a terrible password substitute for this exact reason.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 82 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (7 children)

Or at the very least; turn your phone entirely off (shutdown) whenever you expect or encounter police contact.

Biometrics only work when the device is already running. Mobile devices are in their most locked down/secure state when 'at rest', ie shutdown.

In android; there is also a 'lockdown' mode you can quickly activate from the power off screen, that disables Biometrics until next unlock with a pin/pattern, but doesn't fully shutdown so you can still quickly access things like the camera. This has to be explicitly enabled in settings first and will not offer much protection from various lockscreen bypass software available to law enforcement.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

You should always turn off / reboot your phone if you expect it to be potentially be taken

Simply being locked after being unlocked once leaves the phone in a less secure state than if it was fully off or just rebooted and never unlocked.

If you need your phone to record the interaction, then you might only get as far as locking it, but always strive to shut it down.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 44 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (7 children)

Also, don't take your phone to protests. ACAB.

Wear clothing that can't identify you. Hide tattoos and anything that might make you stand out. Get clothes from a free giveaway place, without cameras. Walk a bit differently if you need to.

Cover your face and cover surveillance cameras, or break them, or hack them (do the latter two only if you know what you're doing).

Wear a body cam. Get bear and pepper spray. Pigs can fucking get it.

[–] Headofthebored@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Bicycles don't have license plates if you need a faster way.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

For the clothing thing, it should be enough to buy from a thrift store. Just pay with cash to be safe. Although if you're planning to do something that'll make you of particular interest this may not be enough. Thrift stores do have cameras, and the police could theoretically look for a particular set of clothing being purchased. Its incredibly unlikely and would take a ridiculous amount of effort, but it is possible.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 19 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I use biometrics to access some of the apps on my phone. But my home screen requires a password to unlock.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›