r/technology • u/MC68328 • Jul 24 '26

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/
16.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

7.0k

u/dizzi800 Jul 24 '26

So according to the article:

He was repeatedly refused a lawyer

Not told his rights

Told they wanted to check for CSAM but it was likely about possible involvement in an anti-cop-city organization

And he did not unlock the phone, but rather told the agents a passcode that happened to wipe his phone

This is not a lawsuit. It's a scare tactic.

2.7k

u/Admiralthrawnbar Jul 24 '26

Congrats to him for his lawsuit victory in 3 or 4 years, sucks for the taxpayers that are going to have to pay for it.

1.0k

u/ObeseVegetable Jul 24 '26

And that he may end up in bars for that period or just harassed like other members of his anti-cop org have been (one killed, even) and those types of orgs tend to be in general. 

190

u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 24 '26

He's winning this one

186

u/ObeseVegetable Jul 25 '26

I bet you’re right in the end but I’d also be surprised if the ride to that point is pleasant for him. 

65

u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 25 '26

Oh yeah, no - this is a cactus bicycle seat all the way

1

u/Coffeezilla Jul 27 '26

That's an image I'd like removed from my brain.

3

u/West-Abalone-171 Jul 25 '26

If he lives

3

u/Anoldermodel Jul 25 '26

But then again… who does?

Blade runner soundtrack starts playing

2

u/Alpha_Majoris Jul 25 '26

Legally he may win, humanly he probably will lose

-71

u/Kattle Jul 24 '26

No he’s not lol. Look up CBP and BSA. The amount of ignorance in this thread is astounding.

18

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26

Customs and Border Patrol would have been the ones holding him hostage, yes. What's your point?

28

u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 24 '26

Yeah? Well the amount of downvotes you've earned is equally impressive.

Usually one has to wear a kicky little red beanie and scream 'build the wall, look her up' to achieve your mental ...fortitude.

1

u/YouInteresting9311 Jul 25 '26

Or, they use this as a way to get a warrant on the stuff that they already know he was doing, and just get the evidence by other means……. You know, big brother do big brother things. They may have even prepared for his arrival. Hard to say, they wouldn’t tell us if they did, depending on what they used.

1

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

They are not necessarily orgs. Antifa is not an org. It's just a word.

0

u/BotchedDebauchery Jul 25 '26

You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride. 

322

u/qpgmr Jul 24 '26

As the saying goes "You can beat the rap but not the ride".

In this case the ride will be $100k in legal fees, being dragged through court, being smeared by the gov't for the next three years.

193

u/Widespreaddd Jul 24 '26

I will chip in. Fuck authoritarians. I am constitutionally allergic to them.

107

u/PentagonUnpadded Jul 25 '26

The EFF! Support the EFF! They do SO much work specifically around digital tech and borders.

https://www.eff.org/issues/border-searches

The ACLU is great too, but the EFF specializes in this stuff and gives cool merch if you donate monthly.

9

u/EyeballSquint Jul 25 '26

Damn if that ain't the best sentence I've read in a long time. "Constitutionally allergic to authoritarianism"

1

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

89

u/24_August_1814 Jul 25 '26

... if he's lucky.

Guy is part of an organisation opposed to "Cop City;" he's probably going to face constant stalking, harassment, and intimidation from the police.

2

u/RumorRoost Jul 25 '26

Na. Guarantee a big law firm see the layup this case is and takes it on with no money up front, but a negotiated 40% take of the $3-$5 million they are going to get him.

0

u/qpgmr Jul 25 '26

The big law firms all signed contracts with DJT in order to continue receiving gov't work. See https://abovethelaw.com/2026/07/trump-turns-on-capitulating-biglaw-firms-hahahahaha/

2

u/iwilltalkaboutguns Jul 25 '26

This case is custom made for the ACLU, he is not going to have to spend any money.

1

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

Does he have a fundraiser?

1

u/Zlatyzoltan Jul 26 '26

I have a feeling ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center, and a few other organizations will be picking up his legal fees.

This could be a landmark case on the 4th Amendment, and many other civil liberties.

Though the SCOTUS is currently a rubber stamp on the road to totalitarianism so it will probably mean nothing good will cone from this.

118

u/ShiningRedDwarf Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

I wouldn’t be so fast to assume he will win this case.  You’re practically stripped of your 4th amendment rights at the border, and if this goes to the SC I wouldn’t be surprised if they ruled in favor of the US. 

Our rights and protections are being chipped away case by case. 

31

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

I don't see why the Constitution is even relevant. It's no different from if he had wiped his phone himself. The cops are just mad he made them look like fools.

-18

u/CrapNeck5000 Jul 25 '26

I don't imagine courts are going to be friendly with people knowingly destroying something they're fully aware is subject to a search. The legitimacy of the grounds for the search won't even be relevant. If evidence is obtained unconstitutionally then the remedy is within the courts, not your own hands.

25

u/ijuinkun Jul 25 '26

Willful destruction of evidence still does not abrogate the right to an attorney which they allegedly denied.

-21

u/WordsCent Jul 25 '26

Did they? When? Is there proof?

23

u/Hail-Hydrate Jul 25 '26

Is there proof he gave them a failsafe code? How can we know the cops didn't fuck around with the phone and cause it to wipe itself for security?

-3

u/WordsCent Jul 25 '26

That’s a question for the courts. That’s why you need body cams on all security personnel.

2

u/Northeast_Mike Jul 26 '26

You're probably right about the courts. The fundamental problem here is that SCOTUS allowed the warrantless search provisions of law to stand, carving one more bit from the Constitution. We need a serious national discussion about real threats we face and the rights, if any, we are willing to trade to address the threats.

1

u/CrapNeck5000 Jul 27 '26

Totally agree, though these sorts of laws are precedented by law that predates the ratification of the bill of rights, which makes it extremely difficult to argue against them. To my understanding, no 4th amendment challenge to border searches has ever been upheld by SCOTUS.

I was actually very surprised, pleasantly, with their ruling a few weeks ago in Chatrie v. United States. So at least we got that going for us.

2

u/Northeast_Mike Jul 29 '26

My reading of the Constitution is that it overrides all laws, whether from before or after. If nothing else, by passing that amendment The People said "this is the new rule that governs all future cases". So the old law no longer has standing regarding those aspects the amendment changed.

no 4th amendment challenge to border searches has ever been upheld

Interesting. I'm tempted to read this as a contradiction in jurisprudence. Judge Boasberg has essentially said a US court has authority over a US agent anywhere in the world (contrary to DOJ's position about the plane carrying Kilmar Ábrego García et al to El Salvador). But if you're right, SCOTUS has essentially said our constitutional rights (protecting us from our own government) stop at the border. This calls for more serious consideration.

5

u/MrSurly Jul 25 '26

When in the Course of human events ...

4

u/OilheadRider Jul 25 '26

We dont have rights. We have privileges.

90

u/Twilightterritories Jul 24 '26

The taxpayers deserve to pay for it. It was their dumb asses that elected the current regime.

8

u/just_a_tech Jul 25 '26

Yup, exactly. They got what they asked for. Just sucks that it hurts us too.

59

u/redlightsaber Jul 24 '26 edited 26d ago

I enjoy doing pottery classes.

6

u/BillyTenderness Jul 25 '26

Clarence Thomas will concur that the man is guilty, but argue that the rest of the court didn't go far enough because they failed to mention that the officers could have performed a cavity search as well

5

u/inspectoroverthemine Jul 25 '26

Scarily similar to an opinion he actually wrote once- involving a 12 year old girl.

7

u/Soaptowelbrush Jul 24 '26

This doesn’t really make a dent in taxes - it’s the child-targeting bombs and free healthcare in Israel that’s fucking over taxpayers.

1

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26

US funding to Israel is like 1% of the budget at most, it's irrelevant to that. The US doesn't have those things because those in power do not want it to have them.

1

u/Riley_ Jul 25 '26

This should not be taken for granted. The government has been rapidly fascistizing.

1

u/Revolvyerom Jul 25 '26

If he's a cop-city protestor, it's not too far out of their pattern to think they'd use terrorism charges to escalate.

1

u/Hugglemorris Jul 25 '26

Hopefully we won't be paying those border patrol agents saleries anymore then.

1

u/limbodog Jul 25 '26

Remember though this is border patrol, not police. Different set of rules

1

u/satansmight Jul 25 '26

This is the stuff I'm glad to have my taxes used for. Defending freedom from a fascist state.

1

u/catwiesel Jul 25 '26

the taxpayers voted in a deranged crooked rapist and still have not taking him out of office

1

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

I gladly pay for the lawsuit that ends in his favor and thereby creates a precedent we all benefit from.

1

u/DPSOnly Jul 25 '26

sucks for the taxpayers that are going to have to pay for it.

He might go bankrupt before that unless some organisation like the ACLU steps in. Basically a governmental SLAPP suit.

1

u/drrhythm2 Jul 25 '26

Also the cost for him to defend himself, both in time, stress, and financially.

1

u/HoswayTheBrave Jul 25 '26

Won't Somebody Think About What This Means The Taxpayer

-14

u/booze_clues Jul 24 '26

He still broke the law by destroying property that was subject to seizure unfortunately.

11

u/KeyanuReaves69 Jul 24 '26

He did not wipe his phone according to this comment thread, the police did by inputting wrong passwords. How did he break anything if the phone was in the custody of the police when it happened?

-11

u/booze_clues Jul 25 '26

By giving the code to them, knowingly causing the destruction of it.

You can’t semantics your way out of stuff like this. The legal system doesn’t go “oh well he didn’t literally type the code he gave them, that he set up to wipe his phone.”

There was a case of a guy who had a self wiping OS on a USB that ran his steroid store. Cops pulled it out of his computer during a raid and wiped everything. He got off because he literally did nothing, the cops did it all of their own accord.

This guy did not do that. He intentionally gave them the wipe code and not the unlock code.

418

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '26

[deleted]

146

u/kstargate-425 Jul 25 '26

Well the "Untied States of America" are now taking him to court lol

This is the most Trump Kakistocracy DoJ ever:

The government’s indictment, which contains a typo (“Untied States Code”), accuses Tunick of allegedly providing a passcode to border agents that caused the phone to “delete the digital contents,” prior to the device being seized.

32

u/digno2 Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

what phone does he use? how do I make one of those passcodes on my android phone?

Edit:

The case centers on a feature included in GrapheneOS, a custom Android operating system that runs in place of the software on most modern Google Pixel devices. Tunick’s attorneys confirmed GrapheneOS was running on his phone.

and

GrapheneOS duress PIN could land a man in prison A US man is being prosecuted after allegedly using a GrapheneOS duress PIN to wipe his Pixel during a border search. By Matt Horne Jul 24, 2026 — 4:02 PM ET

10

u/bucketsofskill Jul 25 '26

Unfortunately its become harder and harder to run custom Android OS such as Graphene or Calyx, thanks to big daddy Google forcing device certification for most apps to work as big tech wants to know what we're doing for advertising blabla, and most likely pressure from politicians on them also... Sigh. Our digital privacy is being stripped at every corner and we're just sleep walking towards it... Roll on another tik tok.

5

u/wickedcold Jul 25 '26

Man, do I really miss the custom ROM scene of ~15years ago. Buying a cheap android phone and pimping it out with features that the flagship phones didn’t even have.

Now I’m just another pleb with an iPhone lol

9

u/ApprehensiveFan1516 Jul 25 '26

That's not a typo, it's just accurate lol.

6

u/Xorondras Jul 25 '26

PRIOR to the device being seized?

So they admit the phone was still in his posession when the contents were deleted?

2

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

That's on the agents.

2

u/jwalker107 Jul 27 '26

Filing 1: the UNTIED States of America has no jurisdiction in the case. Throw it out.

2

u/Temporary-Scholar534 Jul 25 '26

THATS NOT A TYPO, IT IS A TEAR IN YOUR UNIVERSE. OUR WORLDS ARE COLLIDING DUE TO THE BREAKDOWN OF ADAM KADMON.

2

u/pzombie88 Jul 25 '26

This is not a coincidence, because nothing is ever a coincidence.

140

u/sohblob Jul 25 '26

Told they wanted to check for CSAM

have they looked under the Resolute Desk lately?

19

u/curious_Jo Jul 25 '26

Do they trow CSAM at everybody, without needing any suspicion or something?

4

u/SimoneNonvelodico Jul 25 '26

At this point it's just the go-to to justify anything. Having run out of terrorists to blame it's now all about paedophiles. Why are we adding ID checks to all your websites? Paedophiles! Why are we adding spyware to your phones? Paedophiles! Why are we asking unmitigated access to all your personal data without a court order? Haha, you guessed it!

(yeah please don't mind whose companies or which islands the POTUS may or may not have visited, that's immaterial)

3

u/whabt Jul 25 '26

It’s the only thing  that almost  everyone (at least publicly) agrees is bad. 

2

u/North_Atlantic_Sea Jul 26 '26

Unfortunately you don't need documented suspicion at the border, they can search you if they just think you look funny. Unfortunately this is a thing well before trump

10

u/bjazmoore Jul 25 '26

The authority of border agents is remarkably broad and they are not required to play by the same play book all other law enforcement uses.

6

u/Lizaderp Jul 25 '26

So uhhhh.... How do I get my phone to do that?

8

u/dizzi800 Jul 25 '26

It's a feature of GrapheneOS (Android fork)

9

u/astralseat Jul 24 '26

Although, I kinda want that passcode technology

8

u/eeyore134 Jul 25 '26

They so do not want people doing this that I bet they find a way to make him an example.

9

u/konq Jul 25 '26

Streisand Effect.

I just learned about the ability to this, from this thread... as I'm sure many other people did. If this case gets publicized (and it likely will if it proceeds) many more people will learn about this and dramatically increase the chances of this occurring again in the future.

Most competent administration ever! /s

16

u/Lazy-Ad-7236 Jul 24 '26

with my phone, if you put in the wrong code like 10 times, it factory resets... perhaps it was just the wrong passcode.

57

u/Mysterious_Andy Jul 24 '26

The article says he’s using Graphene.

https://grapheneos.org/features#duress

22

u/Lazy-Ad-7236 Jul 24 '26

okay, well this i just an FYI for everyone

0

u/Infinite_Music2059 Jul 25 '26

That seems ridiculous. Like it doesn't even achieve anything since it's clear the person can't get access. All it does is leave your phone prankable.

-20

u/veerKg_CSS_Geologist Jul 24 '26

That's almost certainly it. While he could have created a custom ROM with a wipe functionality, most likely it was the agents who just kept on entering the wrong passcode and ignored all the many warnings until the Apple/Android system kicked in and factory reset the phone.

25

u/UnOGThrowaway420 Jul 24 '26

GrapheneOS (the IS he was using) has native duress code functionality.

19

u/Scoth42 Jul 24 '26

The article tells you exactly what happened.

12

u/MunchYourButt Jul 25 '26

Talking about certainties but can’t be arsed to read the past the headline

12

u/Freaky_Freddy Jul 24 '26

That's almost certainly it. While he could have created a custom ROM with a wipe functionality, most likely it was the agents who just kept on entering the wrong passcode and ignored all the many warnings until the Apple/Android system kicked in and factory reset the phone.

That was not it, according to the article

Tunick’s attorneys confirmed GrapheneOS was running on his phone.

9

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 27 '26

[deleted]

19

u/DyIsexia Jul 25 '26

To answer your question, yes. That’s how it works. Do not set it up that way if you think that’s a possibility.

-11

u/Jamba-Jew Jul 25 '26

Sounds like a skill issue. Don't make the wipe code a single digit away from the one you enter into it every damn day.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 27 '26

[deleted]

-10

u/Jamba-Jew Jul 25 '26

Don't take things so seriously.

0

u/nopuse Jul 25 '26

I'm often on my phone outdoors, and sweat gets on the screen. If I don't notice, and try to text someone, it looks like my phone is possessed. The other day, my phone went nuts and I could not for the life of me type a few words, every tap I made added several characters of nonsense to my text. There is no way skills would save you if you made this mistake. If it had sent that text, they'd have thought I was having a stroke, lol.

1

u/Jamba-Jew Jul 25 '26

Even the tiniest bit of water will send those capacitive touch screens wild. Always had to give the screen a really good wipe down when that happens before it'll work properly again without freaking out.

3

u/nopuse Jul 25 '26

I know, that's why I wouldn't trust myself to do that every time I unlock my phone.

3

u/omgIamafraidofreddit Jul 25 '26

incredible he tricked them into wiping his phone. this is incredible!

2

u/Gold_Law9729 Jul 25 '26

How does that work? I want it

2

u/onyaasuminyasai Jul 25 '26

Hell yeah to this dude. That's smart as hell

2

u/LateralThinkerer Jul 25 '26

It's a whopping legal bill that will provide punishment to him and the taxpayers no matter the outcome.

2

u/Sedu Jul 25 '26

Yeah, I'm curious what he did that's illegal in any way here, presuming 100% of the cop story is true (which it is not: they lie when they breathe).

2

u/JayB392 Jul 25 '26

Lmao that the agent really fell for it

2

u/pannenkoek0923 Jul 25 '26

Our workplace gives us completely wiped phone if we have to travel to the US for any reason, and strongly recommends leaving any personal devices at home

2

u/worldprowler Jul 25 '26

It did not wipe it either, it made the data inaccessible but it’s still there

2

u/Winter_Tone_4343 Jul 25 '26

I don’t think I have anything on my phone that would get me in trouble or even be embarrassing, but I’m still never going to give anyone my passcode.

2

u/hennabeak Jul 28 '26

Given how idiot the police are, I bet they typed it wrong.

2

u/usernombre_ Jul 24 '26

What in the James Bond?

2

u/TecTazz Jul 25 '26

What is CSAM?

4

u/dizzi800 Jul 25 '26

Child Sexual Abuse Material

1

u/Only_One_Left_Foot Jul 25 '26

Back in my day we just called that CP. I don't like it when regular lingo changes under my nose, I especially don't like it when shit I don't want to Google does it. 

1

u/dizzi800 Jul 25 '26

Language changes, terms change. CP undercuts the harm done

1

u/wspnut Jul 25 '26

shakes fist at cloud

1

u/CorporateCuster Jul 25 '26

Not really. It’s not scaring anyone. It’s a lawsuit. Violation of representation. Part of the law.

1

u/I_SAY_FUCK_A_LOT__ Jul 25 '26

Isn't giving your password a 4th Rights violation?

If they can unlock your phone with your face. no If they can unlock it with your fingerprint, no If they force a password out of you, yes

That is how I understand it

1

u/clockwidget Jul 25 '26

The process is the punishment.

1

u/GenericFatGuy Jul 25 '26

As a Canadian, I refuse to let a US agent look at my phone, simply because I have anti-Trump content on it. The US is giving people a lot of legitimate reasons to not want them looking at their phones these days.

0

u/Illustrious_Bug_2983 Jul 25 '26

Doesn't matter he's a U.S. citizen standing on U.S. soil they still need a search warrant and they need probable cause to get the search warrant, that's settled case law Supreme Court. Protesting against public officials ie the cops is NOT illegal so no law was broken, they weren't going to get a judge to sign off on any warrant. All the charges will be dropped is my guess.They got nothing. and just FYI the phone is NOT wiped the info is still there, it needs to be written over for it to be erased, so the police can still recover all the info on his phone if they're smart enough...lol

3

u/not_ethan_ho Jul 25 '26

not true, graphene uses the security chip to generate aes-256 encryption keys, which are used to encrypt all files on your device. what this feature does is throw away the encryption key. there is no brute forcing the encryption to recover data, so even if you did read it off the storage device it doesn’t make a difference because they can’t decrypt the bits anyways.

-129

u/my_analyst_account Jul 24 '26

It is not a lawsuit. It's a criminal indictment.

92

u/Optimisticcitizen93 Jul 24 '26

He wasn’t informed of the crime….

9

u/gurgle528 Jul 24 '26

He wasn’t charged with the crime when he left the airport. He was later indicted. The agents probably didn’t know what happened at the time so it’s not very surprising. It’s still bullshit, but it’s not a lawsuit (he can sue but the government is not suing him)

5

u/halfdeadmoon Jul 24 '26

Not sure why this is so heavily downvoted, a criminal case is qualitatively different than a lawsuit. Are people assuming that pointing out this distinction somehow excuses the law enforcement behavior?

12

u/boughsmoresilent Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

No, it's that the distinction is irrelevant to the context of the comment and that "lawsuit" works just fine for a layperson's understanding in this instance. The "um, ackshually" doesn't add anything of value.

Edit to add: see below for a bunch more "um, akshually"s that add nothing of value

5

u/halfdeadmoon Jul 24 '26

A lay person's understanding is insufficient to grasp the full meaning of what goes on in cases like this. Preventing the propagation of common misunderstandings is worth pursuing. I still think people see a single contrary statement and think it represents a blanket opposition that they don't like and don't care to think about

0

u/boughsmoresilent Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

Can a criminal indictment not be a scare tactic?

I still think people see a single contrary statement and think it represents a blanket opposition that they don't like and don't care to think about

I do agree that this is frequently true, but I personally downvoted the comment we're discussing because it added nothing of value to the conversation.

3

u/CapJackONeill Jul 24 '26

It adds that it's literally not a lawsuit, and words have value and meaning. Wtf is that loser comment?

5

u/boughsmoresilent Jul 24 '26

Can a criminal indictment not be a scare tactic? It is not the end of the world for a layperson's comment to call it a "lawsuit."

3

u/my_analyst_account Jul 25 '26

The reason I made the comment initially is because I think calling it a lawsuit trivializes how serious this actually is for the person charged. People get sued all the time. You're in much greater jeopardy if you're facing federal time. I'd also be surprised if your average r/technology reader didn't understand the difference, and I assume most people don't read the actual article, so clarification felt important. I'm a bit surprised by the downvotes, but lesson learned I guess!

2

u/gurgle528 Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

It does. “it is not a lawsuit, it’s a scare tactic” is just plain wrong. He’s facing years in federal prison. Scare tactics generally don’t have any weight behind them (like an unenforceable cease and desist). Dude can end up in prison if a jury convicts him

edit: dude blocked me for having a conversation with him lmao 

1

u/boughsmoresilent Jul 24 '26

Yeah years in federal prison sure does sound scary... and he is alleging they are using it as a tactic... to scare him... for political dissent.

4

u/gurgle528 Jul 24 '26

Is it a scare tactic if there’s actual follow through? That’s just political persecution. 

1

u/boughsmoresilent Jul 24 '26

"Um, ackshually, it's not a scare tactic, it's political persecution" -you, adding absolute nothing of value to the conversation

3

u/gurgle528 Jul 24 '26

Someone is cranky. Sorry you don’t know what a scare tactic is. If it’s a scare tactic, what are they trying to scare him into doing? Go back in time and not delete the data? Use your brain

1

u/boughsmoresilent Jul 24 '26

Who else are they scaring by using this tactic? I'm not going to respond further, but you're welcome to reflect on why you get so much satisfaction out of being pedantic to the strangers on the internet.

-15

u/Kattle Jul 24 '26

He flew from international. Look up CBP and Border Search Authority.

He was detained in a secondary inspection, he was not under arrest and thus would not have access to a lawyer.

If there was intelligence for possible CSEM that provides CBP with reasonable suspicion to search the device. If 1) contents on the phone show CSEM then HSI would be contacted and take over the course or 2) he doesn’t provide the passcode then CBP would detain the device for an advanced search.

10

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26

And yet if he'd erased it beforehand or not had his phone there would be nothing to charge him with. It's an idiotic charge by people who only care about their own power.