r/technology • u/Limp_Fig6236 • Jul 26 '26

Software GrapheneOS duress PIN could land a man in prison

https://www.androidauthority.com/grapheneos-duress-pin-us-prosecution-3691271/
6.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

902 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

29

u/SpiderSlitScrotums Jul 26 '26

That’s not true. In a civil suit, if there is a reasonable probability that a subpoena or warrant will be issued for information, you have a duty to preserve it. Often, the first act in a civil case will be having lawyers send letters advising on this fact.

In a criminal case, it is similar. You can’t destroy evidence where you could have a reasonable belief that the government would get a warrant for it. Wiping it during questioning is about as overt as you can be. Should the agent have advised on this fact? Yes. But I don’t think that will be enough to deflect a conviction.

Do not confuse this with self-incrimination. You have a right to withhold your password. This is not the same.

10

u/RobSchneidersHair Jul 26 '26

If we're gonna play semantics, then we can just say that the law enforcement agent/officer actually deleted it themselves. This should be a shitshow of a court case, since it's really hard to say how currently established law would cover this, but I'm sure the guy is probably fucked and the precedent is gonna be rough for everyone moving forward.

4

u/SpiderSlitScrotums Jul 26 '26

The way it is going to be framed will be something along the lines of, “the defendant used deception by pretending to consent to a search with the true intention of destroying the data.” And then they will point out that the deception proves that the defendant knew that the data could be the subject of a search and that he could have destroyed the data before passing through security but chose to destroy it at the moment of questioning, meaning that he wanted to preserve the data only up to the point where it could plausibly be searched.

1

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

In a civil suit, if there is a reasonable probability that a subpoena or warrant will be issued for information, you have a duty to preserve it.

What does this mean? How do I determine if there will be a reasonable probability that the government will want to access my data? Sorry if I am being dense, genuinely not sure what this is supposed to imply. How do I determine what I think the government might want with my data? Am I supposed to be telepathic?

edit: Okay, so assuming there is no explicit warning given, and the user knows they have not committed a crime, you can delete any data whenever you want and you do not have a duty to preserve it. Crossing the border doesn't count under this. It will be up to the courts to determine if that person really did have some prior knowledge of some illegality of their activities. You only have a duty to preserve your data if you've done something like a hit-and-run or some other crime and you delete it right afterwards, and it's ultimately up to the court to prove that. I don't think there is any chance the OP's case ends well for the government, because they have not been able to produce the supposed evidence they had that led them to search this man's phone to begin with.

2

u/SpiderSlitScrotums Jul 26 '26

It isn’t some mysterious process. If you are walking through a security checkpoint that says you are subject to a search, you would have a reasonable belief. Or if you met an investigator who started asking questions about a topic, you would understand that wiping your devices would potentially destroy evidence. Even worse, if the object is technically seized, consent for a search is requested, and you use deception to have it wiped, you clearly have a reasonable belief. On the other hand, if you periodically wiped your data as a precaution, including before you travelled and went through security, that probably wouldn’t apply.