Court rules: Touch ID is not protected by the Fifth Amendment but Passcodes are

Posted on by

Advances in technology always make for interesting interpretations of established law.

Most recently, a Virginia Beach Circuit Court this week ruled that an individual in a criminal proceeding cannot be forced to divulge the passcode to his cellphone as it would violate the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment. At the same time, the Court held that an individual can be compelled to give up his fingerprint to unlock Touch ID, or any fingerprint protected device for that matter.

The Court reasoned that while a passcode requires a defendant to divulge actual knowledge, a fingerprint is a form of physical evidence, akin to a handwriting sample or DNA that authorities are already legally allowed to demand in certain circumstances. In a similar vein, the Supreme Court has previously ruled that while authorities can compel an individual to hand over a physical key to a locked safe, they can't compel an individual to provide them with a combination to said safe; the key in this example is nothing more than physical evidence while the combination, based on an individual's unique knowledge, is categorized as "testimonial."

Mashable adds:

"It's exactly what we thought it would happen when Apple announced its fingerprint ID," Hanni Fakhoury, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights organization, told Mashable. (Android phones such as the Galaxy S5 and HTC One Max also have fingerprint ID systems.)

While the ruling in Virginia Beach is not as binding as a Supreme Court decision, it does establish legal precedent other local courts can draw on. More importantly, "it's just a good wake-up call for people to realize that fingerprint ID doesn't necessarily provide the same sort of legal protection than a password does," Fakhoury says.

As relayed by The Virginian-Pilot, the ruling stems from a case involving a man charged with strangling his girlfriend. Authorities had reason to believe that video footage of the couple's altercation might be located on the defendant's cellphone and "wanted a judge to force" the defendant hand over the passcode.

Read this article:

Court rules: Touch ID is not protected by the Fifth Amendment but Passcodes are

Virginia judge: Police can demand a suspect unlock a phone with a fingerprint

Posted on by

A Virginia Circuit Court judge ruled on Thursday that a persondoes not need to provide a passcode to unlock their phone for the police. The court also ruled that demanding a suspect to provide a fingerprint to unlock aphone would be constitutional.

The case in question this week involved a man named David Baust, who was charged in February with trying to strangle his girlfriend. The Virginian Pilot reports that Baust's phone might contain video of the conflict but that hisphone was locked with a passcode. Baust's attorney argued that passcodes are protected by the Fifth Amendment.

The judge agreed with Baust, though he noted in his written opinion that giving police a fingerprint is akin to providing a DNA or handwriting sample or an actual key, which the law permits, the Virginian Pilot reports. A passcode, though, requires the defendant to divulge knowledge, which the law protects against.

The ruling is interesting because it draws into relief the legal difference between a person's identity and their knowledge. The Fifth Amendment protects peoplefrom being forced to witness against themselves, and last year when Apple's TouchID fingerprint sensor was announced, Ars' sister site Wired noted that fingerprints may not have the same protection as passcodes. A communication is 'testimonial' only when it reveals the contents of your mind, Wired wrote. We cant invoke the privilege against self-incrimination to prevent the government from collecting biometrics like fingerprints, DNA samples, or voice exemplars. Why? Because the courts have decided that this evidence doesnt reveal anything you know. Its not testimonial.

Ars has contacted Baust's attorney and will update if we hear any comment from him.

Follow this link:

Virginia judge: Police can demand a suspect unlock a phone with a fingerprint

Judge Rules Suspect Can Be Required To Unlock Phone With Fingerprint

Posted on by

Apple and Google have taken steps recently to let users protect information stored on smartphones even from law enforcement. It turns out there may be a fingerprint-sized gap in that plan.

A Virginia Circuit Court judge ruled Tuesday that police officers cannot force criminal suspects to divulge cellphone passwords, but they can force them to unlock the phone with a fingerprint scanner.

If applied by other courts, the ruling could become important as more device makers incorporate fingerprint readers that can be used as alternatives to passwords. Apple introduced the technology last year in its iPhone 5S and Samsung included it in its Galaxy S5.

When those phones arrived, lawyers said users might be required to unlock the phones with their fingerprints. More recently, Apple and Google said they had changed the encryption scheme on the newest phones using their operating systems so that law enforcement cant retrieve the data. FBI Director James Comey criticized the companies, saying were allowing users to place themselves above the law.

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives people the right to avoid self-incrimination. That includes divulging secret passwords, Judge Steven C. Frucci ruled. But providing fingerprints and other biometric information is considered outside the protection of the Fifth Amendment, the judge said.

The ruling came in the case of David Baust, an emergency-medical-services captain accused of domestic abuse. Police obtained a search warrant for Bausts phone and asked him to unlock it so they could look for video evidence against him. Baust refused, citing the Fifth Amendment and his right to protect his privacy; Baust said police could search for other, embarrassing items on the phone that are unrelated to the case.

In the wake of Judge Fruccis ruling, Baust does not have to provide his password, but he is required to place his finger on his iPhones fingerprint sensor.

Baust planned to comply Friday morning at a police station in Virginia, his lawyer, James Broccoletti said in an interview. The meeting was postponed because the detective needed to attend to a sick child.

Baust will head to the police station on Monday morning instead, but Broccoletti believes police still may be unable to unlock the phone because it should require a password, in addition to a fingerprint, once it has been shut off.

If they are unable to gain access to the phone, prosecutors in the case could appeal the password ruling to the Virginia court of appeals.

Read more:

Judge Rules Suspect Can Be Required To Unlock Phone With Fingerprint

Open government group: Scott won't commit to reversing practices in second term

Posted on by

Declaring that Florida's open government laws have been "under attack in recent years," the First Amendment Foundation asked the two candidates for governor to answer three questions pledging to reverse recent trends and operate with more transparent practices if they are elected.

Gov. Rick Scott and challenger Charlie Crist were asked if they would agree to conduct all public business on public computer networks and devices, release a detailed schedule of appointments and travel, and pledge that he and staff will not use private email accounts when conducting business.

Crist, a Democrat, responded that he would. Scott, a Republican, did not respond.

The First Amendment Foundation is a non-profit open government watchdog that receives its support from voluntary contributions and many of the state's news organizations.

The governor's failure to respond comes against a backdrop of increasing questions about his commitment to Florida's open government laws.

During his term, Scott has blocked data about his private air travels from public flight tracking records. He has released only superficial details about his daily schedules. He has used, and allows his staff to use, private email accounts when corresponding on public business, creating additional barriers to public access. And his staff has been encouraged to use private cell phone accounts when sending text messages about politically sensitive issues.

In each case, the governor has said he has followed the law but his actions have drawn lawsuits.

He is is being sued by Tallahassee attorney Steven R. Andrews, a Republican, for allowing his staff to alter calendar entries, for withholding documents from public records requests and for failing to say who opened his private gmail accountand the gmail accounts of his staff. He faces another lawsuit, from attorney general candidate George Sheldon, a Democrat, alleging that his financial disclosure forms fail to reflect more than $200 million of his wealth because it excludes assets his wife owns but which Scott remains as the beneficiary.

Here are the responses from Crist:

Q: As governor, will you release a weekly calendar in advance that details your appointments, public meetings, and travel schedule?

More here:

Open government group: Scott won't commit to reversing practices in second term

Seriously? What Marriage Equality Opponents Are Saying – October 30th

Posted on by

Here's the the latest in our ongoing series of some of the crazy things the anti-gay marriage equality opponents are saying and doing around the world.

I Totally Don't Understand What The First Amendment Says

Joe.My.God Points out that Bryan Fischer is mixing up his lies about the First Amendment. Speaking about the Houston pastor subpoenas, he said:

But as Joe so cleverly points out:

What a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.

full story

Matthew Shepard's Death is a Hate Crime Myth

ADF attorney Erik Stanley says the whole Matthew Shepard thing was a myth cooked up by gay activists to advance their agenda:

Unfortunately,some on our side are taking the bait, lending these charges credence, including Andrew Sullivan, who should know better.

full story

Link:

Seriously? What Marriage Equality Opponents Are Saying - October 30th

New Hampshire ACLU Files Lawsuit to Make Ballot Selfies Legal

Posted on by

The New Hampshire ACLU has filed a lawsuit that challenges the states ban on sharing photos of completed ballots aka ballot selfies charging that the law violates the first amendment.

There is no more potent way to communicate ones support for a candidate than to voluntarily display a photograph of ones marked ballot depicting ones vote for that candidate, the lawsuit reads.

New Hampshire has long had a law on its books banning voters from taking photos of their ballot, theoretically as a way to stop people from selling their vote. In June, the law was updated to explicitly outlaw taking a digital image or photograph of his or her marked ballot and distributing or sharing the image via social media. Violators can be punished up to $1000.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

(Massachusetts has a similar anti-ballot selfie law on its books, although it rarely if ever has been enforced.)

The law went into place Sept. 1 before the New Hampshires primary elections, and at least three people have already been investigated by the states attorney general for sharing photos of their ballot on Twitter and Facebook. One of those photo-takers, former police officer Andrew Langlois, shared a picture of his ballot in which he wrote-in the name of his deceased dog Akira as his Republican choice for the US Senate.

Another violator, state Representative Leon Rideout of Lancaster, took a ballot selfie and shared it to Twitter to make a statement, he told the Nashua Telegraph.

Langlois, Rideout, and another politician are named as plaintiffs in the ACLU lawsuit, which argues that their ballot selfies were political speech and therefore protected by the first amendment.

What this law ignores is that displaying a photograph of a marked ballot on the Internet is a powerful form of political speech that conveys various constitutionally-protected messages that have no relationship to vote buying or voter coercion, the lawsuit reads.

Read more from the original source:

New Hampshire ACLU Files Lawsuit to Make Ballot Selfies Legal

Facebook Just Created a Custom Tor Link and That's Awesome

Posted on by

Facebook is often criticized over privacy concerns, but the social network just made a historic move in the name of security and anonymity. The social network just created a dedicated Tor link that ensures people who visit the site from the anonymous web browser won't be mistaken for botnets. This is a big deal, mostly because it's Facebook.

Before I say anything else, this is the Tor address, and if you're a Tor user who also uses Facebook, you should start using it immediately: https://facebookcorewwwi.onion/

Now about that big deal claim. Today's news means that Facebook is the first website with a Certificate Authority to launch a dedicated Tor URL and certified connection through the browser. While you may think of Facebook as the pioneer of invading your digital privacy, the company has done a much better job pioneering better security methods on the internet. This is not surprising, since so many people use Facebook and a compromised Facebook accounts can do real damage. It is good news to know that this behemoth is using some of its mountains of cash to make the internet a safer place.

As for the new Tor URL itself, the need was clearly there. Over the years, Facebook has received tons of complaints from users who said that the site doesn't work right in the Tor browser. For instance, fonts were all over the place, and ads were weird. Facebook, meanwhile, realizes that Tor's method of routing connections through several computers in order to preserve the users' anonymity compromises some of the many important security measures the site has already implemented (e.g. HTTPS, Perfect Forward Security, HSTS, etc.). Namely, Facebook's security measures often think that users logging into the site through Tor are not actual humans but rather botnets trying to cause trouble.

This is true! I just tested it out. I logged into my dusty old Facebook profile from Chrome and everything was normal. Then, with that Facebook tab still open, I fired up Tor and navigated to facebook.com, where I was greeted by the normal log in screen. That's when things got weird. Facebook immediately thought I'd been hacked:

Simultaneously, the Facebook tab I had open in Chrome went dark. Facebook automatically signed me out. I didn't even refresh the page, I was just kicked out. This is normal for a potential Facebook hack, but a little bit startling nevertheless.

So, in order to get into my account, I went through the motions which were sort of fun:

Originally posted here:

Facebook Just Created a Custom Tor Link and That's Awesome

Cryptocurrency Round-Up: MintPal CrowdFunds Legal Case Against Alex Green Over Missing Bitcoins

Posted on by

The price of bitcoin continues to languish below $350 as cryptocurrency markets stagnate.(IBTimes UK)

The price of bitcoin has been relatively stable over the last 24 hours, but remains at its lowest level for three weeks.

There was little movement across other cryptocurrency markets, with the only significant movement coming from darkcoin. The privacy-centric altcoin saw a 6% rise in value to take its market capitalisation to $8.5m (5.32m).

One of the biggest movers across all markets was carboncoin, the "energy efficient cryptocurrency devoted to lowering the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere". It saw a 70% price rise since yesterday.

MintPal prepare legal action against Alex Green

The saga surrounding former Moolah chief executive Alex Green, who previously went by the name Ryan Kennedy, could soon be entering a court of law, as bitcoin exchange MintPal look to raise funds to mount a legal case against him.

In a statement released on Pastebin, MintPal detailed the criminal activity that it claims Green has carried out, including the theft of around 4,000 bitcoins in user funds.

"The law firm we have been working with is Selachii LLP, and I am looking into the possibility of raising $25K to cover the remaining costs in our legal battle against Ryan," the statement said.

"A bitcoin wallet has been set up for this and will remain in the custody of one of the most trusted members of crypto community, CryptoCobain (aka Jordan Fish), who has offered escrow and lent his support in our efforts of bringing Mintpal back.

"If we are successful, the legal fees will be awarded against Ryan Kennedy and the bitcoins donated to cover the legal fees will be returned to the donors."

Visit link:

Cryptocurrency Round-Up: MintPal CrowdFunds Legal Case Against Alex Green Over Missing Bitcoins

Cody Wilson, Defense Distributed, "The Bitcoin Community Has Sold Out" – Video

Posted on by


Cody Wilson, Defense Distributed, "The Bitcoin Community Has Sold Out"
On Saturday October 25 Derrick Broze caught up with Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed. Cody produced the controversial 3D printed gun, The Liberator. Cody d...

By: The Conscious Resistance

Here is the original post:

Cody Wilson, Defense Distributed, "The Bitcoin Community Has Sold Out" - Video

Bitcoin Talk Show #31 — Call IN! Live Wednesdays 12:00 – 2:00 PM – real bitcoin talk live! – Video

Posted on by


Bitcoin Talk Show #31 -- Call IN! Live Wednesdays 12:00 - 2:00 PM - real bitcoin talk live!
Donate to Derrick: http://peacenewsnow.com/donate/ Help WCN go to Money2020: 1J2KUZsiSKhdD7g3vxdFvhcKsJVKqvh7jK https://blockchain.info/address/1J2KUZsiSKhdD7g3vxdFvhcKsJVKqvh7jK.

By: World Crypto Network

Original post:

Bitcoin Talk Show #31 -- Call IN! Live Wednesdays 12:00 - 2:00 PM - real bitcoin talk live! - Video