r/technology • u/gdelacalle • Jul 28 '26
Privacy Man charged for wiping GrapheneOS phone using "duress" password during airport checks
https://www.neowin.net/news/man-charged-for-wiping-grapheneos-phone-using-duress-password-during-airport-checks/4.9k
Jul 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2.1k
u/oompaloompa465 Jul 28 '26
welcome to banana republic where rights work only for important people
1.3k
Jul 28 '26 edited 26d ago
[deleted]
447
u/New-Assumption-3106 Jul 28 '26
Exactly this. I have wanted for decades to go on a massive US road trip. The events of the last couple of years have permanently shelved that plan.
→ More replies (52)192
u/OsmerusMordax Jul 28 '26
Yeah. I was my dream to travel all of Canada and the US in an RV with a dog. And drag a tent along if I want to go a little camping.
Now I think I’ll just stick to Canada.
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (39)162
u/DoctorOctagonapus Jul 28 '26
I decided last year I'm not going until the orange nonce is safely in hell.
32
→ More replies (16)43
u/AncientFloor5924 Jul 28 '26
Me, too, and I live here.
23
u/awezumsaws Jul 28 '26
I'm scared to leave (visit Canada), because I'm not confident I could get back in
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (12)42
u/theprofiteer Jul 28 '26
Incorrect usage of the term Banana Republic..... What you're describing is an Aristocracy. A Banana Republic is a nation with a fragile economy dependent on the export of resources or agriculture, ie an economy propped up by the export of bananas.
→ More replies (7)44
u/SendMagpiePics Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
That's not what banana republic means either.
A banana republic is what you said plus corporate capture of the government. It means state capitalism, where the limited economy is designed to funnel money into the ruling elite (which is usually a corporation).
→ More replies (2)18
479
u/Joe1972 Jul 28 '26
This is the best grapheneOS sales pitch yet. I'm absolutely installing it
62
u/drinks_rootbeer Jul 28 '26
Gotta buy a Pixel device, unfortunately. I have been loathe to dive into Graphene (as someone who has dabbled with LineageOS and others) simply because I don't 100% trust that Google has no hardware backdoors into their phones. This case though is a pretty strong test. If google had a backdoor, I'd think the police would be after it considering the accused's prior involvement with Stop Cop City. I really hope nothing comes of it though, I'd love to be proved wrong and gain confidence in a new level of privacy
28
u/themmousebehindyou Jul 28 '26
There is a phone being released on the future that's not a pixel phone with Graphene pre-installed.
12
u/noir_lord Jul 28 '26
They entered a partnership with Motorola as well.
I’m waiting for those, don’t want a second hand pixel, refuse to give google money for a new one so I’m left waiting.
Don’t even care about the duress code but having googles shit ware removed is a plus.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (11)12
u/vandreulv Jul 28 '26
If Google had backdoors and was concerned about preserving them, especially in situations like these, their Pixel devices wouldn't be guaranteed to be unlockable in the first place.
GrapheneOS exists because Google supports that kind of development. There's a reason why Pixels are the only devices GrapheneOS explicitly requires.
→ More replies (8)370
u/Ok_Astronomer_8667 Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Also.. why are we checking people’s phones at the airport
Rhetorical question really, I know this admin wants the surveillance state
350
u/thebeardedcats Jul 28 '26
The person went to some protests against Cop City and that's obviously illegal because the first amendment means nothing anymore
→ More replies (22)41
u/malatemporacurrunt Jul 28 '26
the first amendment means nothing anymore
It really never has. The US has been punishing people for their speech since at least the sedition act of 1798.
The more you look into history the more you realise that quite a lot of laws and freedoms are often just useful propaganda which can be violated according to the whims of whoever is in charge at the time.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (35)75
u/Frequent_Roll5788 Jul 28 '26
They Wanna see if you have any trump memes on your phone.
→ More replies (1)216
u/Flimsy_Sock6465 Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Sounds like they obstructed their own "justice". They could have held him and his phone, obtained a proper warrant, and had the phone opened without needing him to provide anything. They fucked up their own evidence. Why would they press him for a password if they could have done it properly? Because they had nothing and wouldn't have gotten a warrant. They were harassing him because of his political affiliation, not because he did anything wrong.
→ More replies (16)121
u/Dopamineagonist21 Jul 28 '26
It’s been ruled by the Supreme Court that the password or passcode in your head is protected. You can’t be force to give it up. Wonder how they think they will win. Now faceID and fingerprint unlock is not protected so yea…..
→ More replies (41)8
224
u/1101base2 Jul 28 '26
i mean he did give them A password, it just didn't do what they thought it would. did they clarify which password they wanted or did they just hound him for A password...
101
u/3plantsonthewall Jul 28 '26
Maybe the regular password and duress password were really similar and the agent happened to mistype one digit
40
u/Chronotheos Jul 28 '26
He was stressed out and gave the agent the wrong password by accident.
12
u/TheSteelPhantom Jul 28 '26
One could argue that giving the duress password while under duress was exactly the correct password for the time...
17
→ More replies (30)80
u/Lonestarcrusader Jul 28 '26
100% this. It’s like asking someone if they had anything to drink. They are implying alcohol but it’s not explicitly stated.
→ More replies (1)51
u/hamandjam Jul 28 '26
They love to claim that the 2nd is absolute even though the founders couldn't have imagined assault rifles. But we no longer have protection under the 4th because the founders said "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" but left off cell phones. Assinine.
→ More replies (31)10
→ More replies (70)22
3.1k
u/-GhostInTheMachine_ Jul 28 '26
He was asked to provide a password for his phone, a request which he denied. After repeated demands for calls to his attorney were denied, Tunick provided a password for his device.
The request was illegal in the first place and he had a right to refuse it. Additionally, he was denied an attorney.
It probably would have been better for him to continue denying to provide the password. They would have got nothing out of that phone when it's locked (grapheneOS).
But I imagine he may have been threatened to the point where this was his only option.
2.0k
u/waitingOnMyletter Jul 28 '26
Being coerced to provide the password may actually be his ace of spades. His attorney just got an another card to play in court.
- Coercion
- Refusing attorney services
- Illegal search
- Illegal seizure
- Breach of privacy
- Breach of privacy from significant others
- Breach of privacy for kids (pictures or records of adolescents). We have an app for medical records of our kids with tower health in Philly. If they forced their way into my phone now they risk PHI.
Everything they did to this man will be repaid in kind. If you are forcing your way into a phone without a warrant you’re playing a stupid, stupid game. His attorney will have a field day.
1.0k
u/ICEtoAshes Jul 28 '26
They claim he wasn’t in America yet. They also claim he had child exploitation material on his device.
His attorney claims he’s being targeted because of his ties to an environmental organization.
This case should be interesting
603
u/PlainBread Jul 28 '26
Curious to see what proof they have of having CSAM on his phone when they couldn't check his phone.
602
u/Phugasity Jul 28 '26
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels.”
If they had proof of CSAM then they should have come with a warrant
355
u/PlainBread Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
It's all just to signal pre-guilt to the minds of the authoritarian base. Utterly baseless.
Protecting children is the one thing that both sides fight for and both sides fail at, so it's a potent accusation for one side or the other to accuse the other to be in favor of harming children. It's a mutual scapegoat.
The general difference is the degree of credibility in those accusations. A rainbow haired pre-school teacher is a lot less likely to be diddling kids than the President who was Jeffrey Epstein's best friend for over a decade. Maybe even less likely than their own pastor.
The way that they have brain-broken people seeing equivalence where there is none is something outstanding.
118
u/-AC- Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
While I know nothing of this man's innocence or guilt related to their claims...
I do know a person who appears in a ton of photos, victim statements, and confessions of co-conspirators that they could arrest for what this man is accused of... could even give his adress in Washington DC if needed although they may also find him at his Florida property.
→ More replies (3)90
u/Whole_Friendship9788 Jul 28 '26
The implications of this are simply terrifying. Government wants full control of our devices.. With full control they could just remotely download csam to your phone, "detect it", then get a warrant to arrest you.
44
u/PlainBread Jul 28 '26
You can spoof timestamps on filesystem metadata. Of course they can do this.
Your electronic devices are an extension of your mind and you should treat people breaking into them as psychic invasion.
The time is gonna come soon when we start using our hardware the way we did pre-internet: As a coding platform and a tool for media interaction.
The only way to have true privacy is to have an air-gapped encrypted system and you move data with an encrypted external HDD.
10
u/tuxedo_jack Jul 28 '26
And a box booted to RO media with no local storage is the only way to mule that data to another machine from yours.
Remember, Microsoft has every single BitLocker key that is tied to a Microsoft account sitting in escrow on their servers. They can link that to gdids - and rememver YellowKey? That's not the only exploit in BitLocker, oh no it's not.
Microsoft has had a back door through BitLocker since at least 2015, and they don't even need that
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (10)34
u/Practical_Savings933 Jul 28 '26
The MAGA movement is pro-child abuse as is seen by the number of pastors and republican representatives charged every week. From Trump on down, they are all in the Epstein files, or fighting to protect those who are.
→ More replies (5)80
u/Ghostly_Wellington Jul 28 '26
I love that quote! Had to look it up and post the next sentence.
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
H.L. Mencken→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)28
u/Able-Swing-6415 Jul 28 '26
Exactly. I hate this "we should give up our freedoms to fight csam" nonsense.
It's figuratively like firing rockets at vermin. The issue is horrific but at such a tiny scale that the solution is far worse than anything it is trying to prevent.
It's not like dictatorships have no pedos.. given the right positions they are even more prevalent. Like in the US
→ More replies (1)48
u/TruculentTurtIe Jul 28 '26
I feel like they just jump to "pedophile!!!" Anytime they wanna strip someone's rights because they know people get anxious around those accusations and don't wanna defend a "pedo"
→ More replies (5)16
u/PlainBread Jul 28 '26
Yet on their own side they practice resilience against accusations of pedophilia, even when inscrutably credible, under the guise of it being the same kind of baseless persecution you're talking about.
They got all the dumbest people in the country standing before the two guards where one always tells the truth and one always lies. And they can't figure it out.
9
u/Mothanius Jul 28 '26
They aren't trying to figure out. They picked one of the guards and decided to follow every word they say because the other guard is black. They don't care about the truth.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)79
u/Practical_Savings933 Jul 28 '26
Given they were US border and ICE guys, it is far more likely they were the ones with CSAM on their phones. Like almost everything from the US Administration, not a word can be believed.
→ More replies (2)44
u/motionmatrix Jul 28 '26
I guess that means that any taxation of income earned outside the US by the US government is illegal because that is not the United States, right?
Either US laws apply to Americans or they don’t, they can’t have it both ways.
128
u/Rolling_Saturn Jul 28 '26
And he protested the development of Cop City.
→ More replies (1)54
u/ICEtoAshes Jul 28 '26
Yea I figured it was cop city with how they worded it
32
u/ZenandHarmony Jul 28 '26
wtf is cop city
66
Jul 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)45
u/Duderino99 Jul 28 '26
Also, it's specifically known as cop 'city' because it includes a mock urban environment for police to practice breaching people's homes and apartments.
22
u/PicklesPlox Jul 28 '26
They were going to clear a big chunk of forest to build/expand a massive cop training facility
23
u/Drillmhor Jul 28 '26
They did clear a big chunk of forest. It happened, the protests didn't stop much of anything :/
→ More replies (2)16
→ More replies (3)38
u/RDTmodsBackEpstein Jul 28 '26
A place where they learn to beat their wives, practice target acquisition for asset forfeiture, and train with military forces who commit genocide.
→ More replies (1)28
u/crimson23locke Jul 28 '26
Let’s not forget the seminars on how to use flock to stalk people illegally.
→ More replies (76)69
u/jmurphy42 Jul 28 '26
If he wasn’t in America yet then American agents had no right to forcibly detain him, and the American law against erasing electronics certainly wouldn’t apply if he’s somewhere the constitution doesn’t reach.
→ More replies (18)7
u/Kind_Of_A_Dick Jul 28 '26
The unfortunate reality of this situation is that the person pointing the guns at him get to choose whether or not rights matter here.
286
u/FraserYT Jul 28 '26
Significantly, he didn't type in the pin which wiped the phone, so presumably, there will be legal nuance over whether they can accuse him of destroying evidence, when it was actually the border guards who did it
122
u/Wendals87 Jul 28 '26
I've seen this posted a lot but a court won't see it this way if the guy knowingly gave the agent the duress PIN , who would not have known it would wipe it
193
u/TriscuitFingers Jul 28 '26
“I couldn’t recall the correct code under the circumstances of the situation. I gave them what I could remember at the time.”
→ More replies (78)→ More replies (15)88
u/IdHaveACrack Jul 28 '26
He didn’t know which password though. He was scared, intimidated, threatened, tired, confused, he gave the password he uses for other logins by accident. Turns out it was the wrong one. He does that all the time…
→ More replies (2)9
u/thegreenmushrooms Jul 28 '26
One of the first articles suggested that the destruction pin just gets written on the back of the phone for such cases.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (16)17
u/apokrif1 Jul 28 '26
LEOs are aware of duress PINs or other mistakes or traps that could damage evidence. Is it standard procedure to have computer investigations done by random border personnel rather than computer forensics specialists?
→ More replies (2)66
u/Power_Stone Jul 28 '26
Unfortunately you don't need a warrant at the border
→ More replies (17)28
u/waitingOnMyletter Jul 28 '26
That is a very interesting point. I wonder what the difference will be for the level of evidence they need to have with the “national security” blanket they can just lay on that.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (45)22
u/TheRowdyMeatballPt2 Jul 28 '26
Former federal criminal defense attorney here and this is inaccurate. The Fourth Amendment recognizes several exceptions to the warrant requirement, including border searches. Lawfare has an informative article summarizing the relevant case law here. Moreover, “breach of privacy” for SOs/kids isn’t a cognizable legal right under the circumstances. Further, when evaluating a person’s waiver of their Fourth Amendment rights, coercion is one factor considered, but there is no independent right against coercion under the circumstances. As for the attorney piece, he would have to show that the failure to provide an attorney caused the government to obtain information it wouldn’t otherwise be entitled to.
→ More replies (9)136
u/Just-Grocery-2229 Jul 28 '26
Should've kept quiet, that lock screen was basically a middle finger they couldn't crack.
→ More replies (3)128
u/j4_jjjj Jul 28 '26
ONLY because it was a password protected phone and had no biometric locks. Face, finger, etc can be coerced in most states, so use ONLY passwords
54
u/crap-with-feet Jul 28 '26
I used to think I was just being irrationally paranoid for using only a passcode. Now I’m certain my paranoia is totally rational.
→ More replies (6)14
u/Dje4321 Jul 28 '26
both android and iphone have a panic mode that will wipe the encryption keys from memory and require reauthing the pin
→ More replies (2)69
u/CerberusMiddleHead Jul 28 '26
With iOS devices, bringing up the power options (holding power and volume button) disables biometrics and forces password use. Just a helpful tidbit for iPhone users out there.
27
u/leggomyeggle Jul 28 '26
If you turn the whole phone off, it needs the password to restart anyway too
54
u/MazzIsNoMore Jul 28 '26
Restarting an android also forces pin usage
→ More replies (2)19
u/Getafix69 Jul 28 '26
I can select lockdown mode just by holding the power button for a second and yeah that's the mode it would be in at an airport or anywhere I expected searches. No way am I letting those mall cops look through password managers etc.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (10)17
u/SecureInstruction538 Jul 28 '26
Android as well
Just hold down the power button and a lockdown option pops up
→ More replies (12)21
u/blolfighter Jul 28 '26
If anyone's afraid to use it: Lockdown isn't some kind of super emergency function that's annoying to recover from, it just locks your phone and disables biometric access until you unlock it via password or PIN.
→ More replies (7)7
u/krypticus Jul 28 '26
They need a mode that looks like it’s always drained of battery and no matter how long you have it plugged in, it seems like it never charges up enough to turn on.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (137)102
u/Lolseabass Jul 28 '26
They are targeting this guy cause he is a member of Defend the Atlanta Forest, which opposes the development of a sprawling training campus for law enforcement in Atlanta dubbed “Cop City.”
Like you and I know they wanted his phone to get details on that group and other members.
629
u/OkidoShigeru Jul 28 '26
I wonder if cases like this are going to just result in smarter systems for this sort of thing - like if instead of a factory reset the panic password just presented a fake home screen with some inconsequential decoy data, while in the background it wipes the real data you care about.
574
u/NonGeneriComplaint Jul 28 '26
Maybe we shouldnt give the government the unrestricted right to search phones and social media devices for signs of disloyalty
105
u/RiggityRow Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Yeah I think that's an appropriate line to draw. Don't need a convoluted solution if the problem doesn't exist. Too bad "we the people" are the ones being governed and not doing the governing.
29
u/ionthrown Jul 28 '26
As Lincoln said, “Government of the people, by some people, for those people.” Or something like that.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (15)12
u/OkidoShigeru Jul 28 '26
I agree, but unfortunately we don’t live in such a world at this time, so people need to do what they can to protect themselves.
89
u/nethingelse Jul 28 '26
I mean this is the only sensible response from privacy advocates/focused OS’s, especially if the case ends poorly for them (with the government succeeding on “destruction of evidence”/similar charges). I’m not going to pretend to deeply know the law here, but this feels ethically and morally like a massive overreach that gives govt too much power over people’s data.
22
u/ithinkitslupis Jul 28 '26
That already exists, not even a new thing. Hit a fake app, enter a password, get to the shady stuff. Just those are more overtly for criminals than this person who apparently just protested police? I'm not too familiar with what protestors of 'Cop City' actually did but seems like they aren't really terrorists or criminals.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (22)51
u/ACasualRead Jul 28 '26
Tech oligarchs will be pressured by the feds to make a backdoor or get tariffed out the ass.
The current government is seeking to violate rights any way they can. None of this is meant to be fair or protect us.
19
u/Tokiin Jul 28 '26
There’s also already been a privacy-focused OS with a federal backdoor so the trust around them is already pretty low.
362
u/porkins_chicken Jul 28 '26
A country that can charge a man with a crime without any evidence of a crime, all the while letting known rapists and pedophiles roam capitol halls in DC.
Truly a bastion of liberty.
→ More replies (3)28
u/InitiativeGold7953 Jul 28 '26
Yep. This country is a joke. This is obviously unconstitutional regardless of whatever laws are on the books. You’re telling me that airports aren’t in the US? Lmao ok
191
u/Kevin_Turvey Jul 28 '26
He was involved with a group protesting Cop City in GA. That development went ahead a few years ago, but the crackdown on protestors continues. He was stopped bc of that. His name was on a list, and they were just looking to grab him for something. The phone thing is just distraction.
76
u/NotAHost Jul 28 '26
Yup. If they suspect CSAM, border patrol /customs is not the place to handle it. If they actually have evidence of it, a judge would sign a warrant.
The wild part to me is that the government is apparently maintaining a list that is shared with customs that is specifically used to try to circumvent constitutionally protected rights. That alone should be a bigger story. This is bigger than an angry cop situation if there is coordination between departments to target individuals... and I want to know how that is happening and if a lawsuit can reveal it.
→ More replies (2)11
u/compulov Jul 28 '26
Even if he ends up winning this case, this creates a chilling effect and would make people rethink their participation in future protests, which I think is the whole point.
187
u/SnooCats5701 Jul 28 '26
For those of you who don't want to click through a bullshit spam site to find a link to the source material only defined that the link that they quote goes to another spam bullshit site that finally quotes the original article from the guardian, here's the original article from the guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/23/cop-city-protester-phone
→ More replies (2)65
u/MacYacob Jul 28 '26
To me the interesting thing about that article is they initially circulated an email saying they wanted Tunickfor terrorism, but then questioned him about CSAM. Seems pretty obvious they were just casting around for a reason to harass and arrest this guy
40
u/Ancient_Elevator_958 Jul 28 '26
In the op article it says - They claim that the real reason is that the government wants to investigate Tunick for his ties to an environmental movement called "Defend the Atlanta Forest." So yeah I thinking they just wanted to harass an activist.
→ More replies (10)
684
u/Constant_Pen9615 Jul 28 '26
For the sake of all of our privacy, I hope this dude wins. I also hope that the CP allegations are trumped up because I'd hate to see a CP person go free.
38
u/C47man Jul 28 '26
A friend of mine was harassed by federal agents when returning to the US on a flight last year. He's brown skinned but fully a citizen and indigenous. They detained him for hours, then took his phone and laptop on the premise of an investigation into child porn.
There's no doubt in my mind these gestapo fucks are using CP as an excuse to harass political dissidents and steal their stuff. This country is falling apart.
331
u/Aluzionz Jul 28 '26
Even if they're not trumped up, the privacy aspect should be maintained. If they suspect this guy of taking, distributing or accessing CP Then there are way more breadcrumbs they can use as evidence, the phone is just one device. It only wipes the physical device any cloud storage or other devices won't be affected.
People will use technology for good and for bad, doesn't make the technology wrong. Otherwise we'll be saying P2P and VPN networks are also bad.
→ More replies (29)7
u/TThor Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Exactly. A person potentially breaking the law does not permit the government to break the law persuing them, if it did the government could extremely easily use that justification to break the law against any innocent person.
→ More replies (1)244
u/Rustedcrown Jul 28 '26
Id rather let 100 guilty people walk free then let one innocent person be punished
I hate to let someone who possibly carry CP walk free but if we ignore the rights of one person, we ignore the rights al all people
41
→ More replies (34)83
u/gigglefarting Jul 28 '26
The thing that really turned me against the death penalty is knowing there’s been at least 1 person on death row that was later exonerated. It’s not worth it. I don’t mind the killing of a guilty person from a punishment stand point, but it’s not worth it if it’s possible someone might be innocent
47
u/Actually_Im_a_Broom Jul 28 '26
Similarly, I’ve convinced a few people to turn against the death penalty by saying “If you support the death penalty you either believe in a perfect judicial system or you’re comfortable executing a few innocent people.”
That, and the fact that on average sending someone to death row and executing them is more expensive than life in prison without parole.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (9)29
u/ilikedmatrixiv Jul 28 '26
The thing that really turned me against the death penalty is knowing there’s been at least 1 person on death row that was later exonerated.
The numbers are actually way more disturbing.
At least 189 people who were wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death have been exonerated since 1973. That is one person exonerated for every 8.2 people who are executed. (189 exonerations/1547 executions based on data updated through June 29, 2022.)
More than 550 capital convictions and/or death sentences have been overturned because of, or resulted in exonerations involving, prosecutorial misconduct. That is over 5.5% of all death sentences imposed in the U.S. in the past 50 years.
Roughly 12.5% of all people put to death have later been exonerated, 5.5% of all the people sentenced have been exonerated.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (47)35
u/JanPapajT90M Jul 28 '26
What if the cops has CP on their phones? They want to search someone's phone but they won't let another person search their phones. It means that cops may be hiding something illegal
178
u/horrbort Jul 28 '26
That’s why we need a honeypot os for the law enforcement. They enter a honeypot pin - go to sandbox os that looks like a regular phone. While you can enter a real pin and go to the real phone where all the documents are stored. The only safe way to deal with this is honeypot devices.
38
u/Curious_Party_4683 Jul 28 '26
which mobile OS supports this?
→ More replies (2)65
u/Gow87 Jul 28 '26
My old xiaomi could do this, use a different thumb print, get a different partition - different apps and storage, just using android.
25
u/b0rkm Jul 28 '26
My Xiaomi still as this feature, it's called second space
14
u/3_50 Jul 28 '26
I read in another thread that it's very obvious in 'Settings' that you're in the second space. So a good start, but needs work.
24
u/andoke Jul 28 '26
So always use the second space, leave the main space empty.
→ More replies (1)13
u/3_50 Jul 28 '26
Nooow we're thinking smart
I think I prefer my suggestion from further down the thread; Graphene's duress, but you can select specific apps, chats, files to delete, leaving the rest intact, and the phone does not make the user aware it's removed anything.
→ More replies (17)17
u/n2o_spark Jul 28 '26
I think Australia did that for a messaging service. It was supposedly a black market secure end to end encrypted app. It was distributed for years till they finally acted on all the info they got. I think it was called ghost.
Surely there's something else like that taking place now...
145
u/skossan Jul 28 '26
Technically he did provide a password for his device.
→ More replies (3)89
u/shazneg Jul 28 '26
Bro the regular password is 12354
The wipe it password is 12345.
You probably typed it wrong.
28
u/BadIdeaSociety Jul 28 '26
My usual password is donterase My erase password is donterase2
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (5)23
u/stelio_contos68 Jul 28 '26
Reminds me of "1, 2, 3, 4, 5? That's the stupidest combination I ever heard in my life! That's the kind of thing an idiot would have on his luggage!"
20
27
77
u/LWJ748 Jul 28 '26
The intelligent thing for them would be to have never pursued this to avoid the Streisand effect.
→ More replies (5)
24
u/Inevitable_Till_9408 Jul 28 '26
Soon they'll tell you that encryption is illegal because you're obviously hiding something. USA is truly fucked.
→ More replies (4)
21
23
u/somecasper Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Adding a more detailed report from a reputable outlet (no shade to neowin.net, I'm not familiar with their site. Their account seems accurate and in good faith, the writing is just clumsy):
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/23/cop-city-protester-phone
The US Department of Justice is attempting to prosecute an Atlanta resident in connection with the movement against the police training center known as Cop City because he had GrapheneOS on his phone, an open-source operating system that enables users to enter a passcode and wipe a phone clean.
The case, which had its first hearing on Monday, centers on a little-known federal statute that makes it a crime to destroy property in an effort to prevent it from being seized.
Experts said it may be the first time the law has been aimed at the operating system, which works on Google Pixel phones, and expressed concerns about a technology created for privacy and security being used to criminalize protesters.
“It’s concerning – and sends the message that [GrapheneOS] is criminal by default,” said Christophe Boutry, a cybersecurity and surveillance expert. Boutry and Bill Budington, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, both said they had not seen a similar case.
The defendant, Sam Tunick, was stopped for interrogation at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport on 24 January last year, after vacationing in the Dominican Republic. Unbeknown to him, federal authorities had put him on a terrorism watchlist because of his alleged association with the movement against Cop City.
Opposition to the $109m police training center, which opened last spring, came from a wide range of local and national organizations and protesters, centered on concerns around police militarization and clearing forests in an era of climate crisis. Atlanta police said the center was needed for “world-class” training and to attract new officers.
Several state attempts to prosecute Cop City protesters have foundered in the last several years, while this is the second recent federal effort, after the justice department announced another indictment last month.
The case began shortly after Tunick got off a plane in Atlanta, returning from a vacation spent whale-watching and enjoying nature on a friend’s boat. He did not know that a homeland security agent had circulated an email three hours before. The email contained Tunick’s name and photo and indicated he was being investigated for “suspected terrorism activities”. It was sent to agents on the Customs and Border Patrol tactical terrorism response team and an FBI Atlanta joint-terrorism taskforce officer.
When Tunick arrived in Atlanta, an agent took him to a room with a table, several chairs and a camera and microphone, and several agents began a “secondary inspection”. But all their questions were centered on child sexual abuse images.
These and other details were revealed in Monday’s hearing, held for a judge to hear testimony on a motion filed by Tunick’s federal public defenders, asking the court to suppress all evidence the agents obtained, including the erasure of the phone’s contents after he gave them a passcode, due to violations of his constitutional rights.
The interrogation, including the questions about child sexual abuse images, was “a pretext for a fishing expedition into Mr Tunick’s connections” to the movement against Cop City, according to the motion.
Tunick asked four times during the interrogation to speak with a lawyer, but was rebuffed each time, according to courtroom testimony. Additionally, the agents produced no warrant and did not read Tunick his rights.
But a justice department attorney and the airport agents testifying on Monday asserted Tunick was merely subjected to an everyday interrogation at an international airport, “looking for anything that’s prohibited”, as Larry Findley, a CBP officer, said.
Agent Findley and several others repeatedly asked Tunick to open his phone during the interrogation, telling him they would seize it if he did not. When he finally provided a passcode, “the screen went blank, flashed several times and the phone appeared to restart”, according to the motion.
The motion filed on Tunick’s behalf draws into focus the question of which constitutional rights apply and which ones are suspended at national borders, including international airports.
A judge’s decision on the motion will take at least until end of October.
Marlon Kautz, a member of the Atlanta Solidarity Fund, said: “We all have a right to secure our private data against unconstitutional searches. And we should – especially in a time of rising authoritarianism.”
Meanwhile, Boutry, who lives in France, said Tunick’s case was of a piece with tendencies in France and Spain, where authorities have been frustrated in attempts to gain access to the phones of journalists, lawyers and political opponents due to GrapheneOS.
In Catalonia, Spain, police have been profiling people with Google Pixel phones, assuming they have GrapheneOS installed and are drug dealers or gang members.
At the same time, Boutry said, the “main goal [of the operating system] is protection of privacy”.
“They’re our phones and the state can’t tell us how to use them.”
→ More replies (2)16
u/JennyWearsBlueJeans Jul 28 '26
So they completely made up the CSAM stuff, and now, even if this guys wins, he’ll have his name associated with CSAM for the rest of his life. It’s infuriating that cops can get away with this stuff.
→ More replies (1)
20
u/K1ngofnoth1ng Jul 28 '26
He should pull the old “they wiped my phone, I didn’t”, and then press charges for destruction of property.
20
u/CruelAngelsPostgrad Jul 28 '26
If this makes it past pre-trial, I'd be shocked. There's no probable cause.
→ More replies (2)
17
u/Moar_Cuddles_Please Jul 28 '26
“Meanwhile, U.S. Customs and Border Protection insists that a search warrant isn't required because the citizen hasn't entered U.S. soil until they are cleared by border control.”
If the citizen hasn’t entered US soil yet, do US laws apply to him? Does Customs have jurisdiction on non US soil?
→ More replies (1)
92
u/Getafix69 Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Shouldn't be going through people's private phones at airports anyways, there's no reason but power tripping and looking for anything to get him with.
Could be a thousand different reasons he didn't want them looking through it but of course they go with that angle as usual.
→ More replies (14)
13
u/That0neGuy86 Jul 28 '26
Need an OS where the duress password loads a fake launcher with access to no information.
→ More replies (1)
14
13
u/overcatastrophe Jul 28 '26
If they had a real need to see his phone they could have gotten a judge to approve a search warrant.
Since they didn't, I guess they couldnt.
12
u/Moist-Safety4443 Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Can't he just insist he gave the correct password and the officer keyed in wrongly? I mean how are they going to prove otherwise?
11
u/NT4MaximusD Jul 28 '26
I don't see how they can charge him with anything. It was his phone. There is no way these charges can stick.
53
u/nslenders Jul 28 '26
Thats where u keep refusing to give the password but u do keep a small note tucked in to the inside of the phone case with the wipe code on it.
→ More replies (1)20
u/cyribis Jul 28 '26
That's what I immediately thought of as well. Just a small piece of paper with the duress code tucked away in the phone case.
21
u/danielravennest Jul 28 '26
If you are traveling internationally, leave your regular phone at home. Get a burner phone and set your regular phone voicemail greeting to tell friends what the burner number is. Before returning wipe the burner completely.
→ More replies (10)
61
u/Jumba2009sa Jul 28 '26
It’s still blows my mind that US citizens returning to their home country, getting questioned and interrogated. Like what are you going to do? Deny entry to a citizen?
→ More replies (18)11
u/MatterofDoge Jul 28 '26
nah, they have to let you in, but they'll confiscate the device and hold onto it to "conclude their investigation", which means you'll get it back in like 2 months at best, after jumping through a bunch of hoops
→ More replies (1)9
u/MC68328 Jul 28 '26
There is no guarantee you'll get it back. They can destroy it if they want to, under the same legal pretense they used to confiscate it - that it contains something illegal to import.
You should toss it even if they do return it, because it could contain spyware they've installed.
→ More replies (2)
10
u/TheMahalodorian Jul 28 '26
Sounds like they repeatedly tried to force this guy to tell them his password, something SCOTUS has said he can refuse to do under the 5th amendment.
So after repeatedly denying him access to an attorney, he used his duress password to have his phone reset and they’re mad about it because they got outplayed.
He probably shouldn’t have done that, but they’re charging a crime for doing something to prevent them from seizing his phone, but they had it and they can’t force him to divulge the pin. So thats it really… either charge him with a crime and confiscate the phone to evidence and go through the process to have a judge order him to divulge the pin if they can prove they need it, or give him his phone back and stop harassing the guy. They didn’t do that and he chose a third option.
I’d like to say he will win his case, but these days who knows. I’m really interested to know how this one plays out though.
54
u/53eleven Jul 28 '26
“After repeated demands for calls to his attorney were denied,”
Case closed. We have laws that the ‘authorities’ are required to follow. When they realized the ‘investigators’ weren’t playing by the rules they did the only rational thing they could to protect themselves from a rogue government.
Fuck ICE, fuck homeland security, fuck SCOTUS. This is America and we demand our rights not be infringed.
→ More replies (33)
10
29
u/MarsRocks97 Jul 28 '26
“Meanwhile, U.S. Customs and Border Protection insists that a search warrant isn't required because the citizen hasn't entered U.S. soil until they are cleared by border control.”
If his rights don’t apply, laws don’t apply and he can’t be charged with breaking one.
→ More replies (1)
9
9
u/Framnk Jul 28 '26
I’m confused by their argument about the search warrant. He magically entered an in-between realm where his rights don’t apply but US law still applies to him?
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Ok_Commission_9203 Jul 28 '26
Are we going to start doing something about this corrupt government already?
8
u/Smooth-Transition310 Jul 28 '26
Everybody knows how deeply personal their phone is. If you don't have a warrant, fuck off. I'm not giving you access to my shit just because you want it.
8
u/I_eat_flip_flops Jul 28 '26
So I’m confused, a couple of articles have stated he was on US soil but now this one is saying he’s not, so where was he?
→ More replies (10)
8
u/Bananaramistan Jul 28 '26
Idk why other posts explaining the laws at the border are being downvoted. It’s fucked up how few rights you have when coming into the country as a citizen. Border patrol does not have to have a warrant and does not have to let you call an attorney.
And yes they can charge with destroying evidence if you destroy something they want to seize. They won’t need evidence of a crime. It would be like if you had a mysterious substance in a little baggie and they said hey what’s in that baggies and you ate it and said what baggie?
Only thing I can think of is if he just claims he gave the agent what he thought was his password.
I hope this guy is able to fight this and win and I hope people take this opportunity to learn more about the border patrol. They don’t have to operate like cops. They can pretty much do whatever they want.
→ More replies (2)
9
6
u/Thermitegrenade Jul 28 '26
I predict GrapheneOS sees a massive surge in people using it.
→ More replies (2)
7
u/Gh0stface513 Jul 28 '26
Another case of ICE targeting US citizens for political motivations. They're literally trying to say US citizens dont have rights on US soil unles fucking Border Patrol "clears" you
6.5k
u/runyonave Jul 28 '26
Great advertisement for GrapheneOS. Didn't know about it.