• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating systems — group says it will never require personal information

Nobu said:
Yeah, technicallllly the phone deleted the data. I'd lawyer up and it'd be "my client forgot his credentials" till the cows come home.
Click to expand...
Lateralus said:
Well, there is precedent for this kind of thing after all.

Prosecutor: “Nobu, the passcode that you provided to Customs was designed to wipe the phone, correct?”

Nobu: “Sorry - not sure what you mean. Why would they wipe it? Like with a cloth or something?”
Click to expand...
They're trying to bend so many laws here in order to get him. They didn't have a legal reason to look at his phone to begin with since it was an unlawful search. There's a lot going on here since they consider deleting data the same as tampering with evidence. This is where the smart phone meets desktop computer logic, in that deleting data is now a crime. If this were a typical smart phone then nothing could be done, but it wasn't. The owner was smart enough to install GrapheneOS, which means you're not dealing with your typical iPhone/Samsung phone owner. The officer was the one who entered in the passcode and is ultimately responsible for the deleted data. If the officer entered the wrong passcode enough times then GrapheneOS would also erase itself. iPhones do this as well if the feature is enabled.
 
DukenukemX said:
They're trying to bend so many laws here in order to get him. They didn't have a legal reason to look at his phone to begin with since it was an unlawful search. There's a lot going on here since they consider deleting data the same as tampering with evidence. This is where the smart phone meets desktop computer logic, in that deleting data is now a crime. If this were a typical smart phone then nothing could be done, but it wasn't. The owner was smart enough to install GrapheneOS, which means you're not dealing with your typical iPhone/Samsung phone owner. The officer was the one who entered in the passcode and is ultimately responsible for the deleted data. If the officer entered the wrong passcode enough times then GrapheneOS would also erase itself. iPhones do this as well if the feature is enabled.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don't think feigning ignorance would go well, except maybe if graphene were preinstalled (some phones are sold with it), since in that case you could reasonably argue you weren't aware of that feature when you purchased the phone.

But people forget passwords all the time. Especially if it was "recently changed" (they couldn't know otherwise) and you didn't have time to memorize it.
 
Nobu said:
Yeah I don't think feigning ignorance would go well, except maybe if graphene were preinstalled (some phones are sold with it), since in that case you could reasonably argue you weren't aware of that feature when you purchased the phone.

But people forget passwords all the time. Especially if it was "recently changed" (they couldn't know otherwise) and you didn't have time to memorize it.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he should plead ignorance. It was an unlawful search and the cop should be aware of the consequences to entering passcodes on any device. If you can't search a cars trunk without a search warrant, probable cause, or your consent then the same should go for your phone. GrapheneOS even has a feature where if you enter a different passcode then it boots into a sorta clean version without any access to any apps and data, while still retaining the original boot. Technology is quickly changing and you can't expect everything to work as expected.
 
DukenukemX said:
I'm not saying he should plead ignorance. It was an unlawful search and the cop should be aware of the consequences to entering passcodes on any device. If you can't search a cars trunk without a search warrant, probable cause, or your consent then the same should go for your phone.
Click to expand...

You actually can't be compelled to provide a password or PIN even with a warrant, court order, judge, anything. They might be able to argue for obstruction of justice if they seized all of his accounts that had the ability to wipe the data but it doesn't look like that happened.

That's why everyone should always use a password for their accounts, and never anything like a fingerprint, because a court can order you to touch a device without accessing the password equivalent information.
 
Dunno if this was mentioned because I'm lazy, but GrapheneOS has a feature where you can have a second password that deletes the entire phone. So you can give them the second password and it'll just nuke the phone after they enter it.
 
DukenukemX said:
I'm not saying he should plead ignorance. It was an unlawful search and the cop should be aware of the consequences to entering passcodes on any device. If you can't search a cars trunk without a search warrant, probable cause, or your consent then the same should go for your phone. GrapheneOS even has a feature where if you enter a different passcode then it boots into a sorta clean version without any access to any apps and data, while still retaining the original boot. Technology is quickly changing and you can't expect everything to work as expected.
Click to expand...
How is it unlawful? When entering the country CBP has the legal right to search your devices without requiring a warrant don’t they?
 
They can ask, but they can not force you to give it over.

Also, with this, they claim the person destroyed "evidence" but they have no basis on what "evidence" for what, this will get thrown out, but you can bet someone is drafting a change in laws going forward..
 
MrGuvernment said:
They can ask, but they can not force you to give it over.

Also, with this, they claim the person destroyed "evidence" but they have no basis on what "evidence" for what, this will get thrown out, but you can bet someone is drafting a change in laws going forward..
Click to expand...
Be funny they make a law that prohibits people from deleting data on their phones. At some point this insanity has to end.
 
DukenukemX said:
Be funny they make a law that prohibits people from deleting data on their phones. At some point this insanity has to end.
Click to expand...
It wont end though, because big tech will do everything to move liability to us, and governments want backdoors and to track all we do, so they will push through laws, attached to bills that have nothing to do with said law, on the last page no one reads..
 
1785857298038.png
 
DukenukemX said:
If you can't search a cars trunk without a search warrant, probable cause,
Click to expand...
I never heard before that custom needed a warrant to search the trunk of a car entering the USA.... They do not even need a justification or probable cause for it, let alone asking a judge.

International travel usually mean going throught buffer zone where expectation of privacy do not exist. Nothing different for a phone and I imagine the disctintion between a phone that self delete and a car trunk documents that has some lock/opening mechanism that self delete the content if it is not opened in a precise way would legally be the same and be the same potential federal crime facing the same charge.

In both case, they would have to demonstrate that it was not to delete embarassing pictures but intent to impede a lawful investigation or seizure.

To take the envelope example above, no one would be surprised to get into trouble if you went throught custom with an envelope that destroyed the document inside while manipulated by the custom agents, digital tech make things easier that change legal assumption quite a bit (that why we sometime hear a lot of responsability about protecting your digital device with password we never said with mailbox...)

I know of a custom worker which job was to watch the DvDs that went throught the border (and of course zero justification was needed let alone a warrant) it was a terrible job, most of the time it ended up being very intense porn with a limit of what speed up the employee could use, what on a phone seem very similar to that.

A big distinction is people actively did choose to bring Dvds with them in a way a lot of what you bring with you when you travel with a phone just happened to be there for other reasons than travel, but legally it is very similar to look at them in airplane mode with the cloud off.
 
Last edited:
^^ this, Airports and a certain radius, literally have their own laws, they can basically do what ever they want.

This is why, even though i do not keep much on my phone, Signal - I delete it before I travel entirely. Leave usual apps I might use, like LinkedIn, I do not use any other social media sites, nor do I use apps on my phone for them, couple other apps on my phone, Oura Ring, Di.fm for music, couple local apps for my area, but nothing that would have something that might raise questions.

I guess I am just not one to rely on my phone for my day to day life, so it has minimal stuff on it.

But even then, i clear all browser history and cache on some apps, just in case.
 
MrGuvernment said:
It wont end though, because big tech will do everything to move liability to us, and governments want backdoors and to track all we do, so they will push through laws, attached to bills that have nothing to do with said law, on the last page no one reads..
Click to expand...
Changing laws without anyone noticing is hard to do now. The internet very much sensationalizes everything. Even if a law gets passed then it won't stick around. Even California's Age Verification law might not last.

"Stephanie Joyce argues that “the Constitution prohibits the government from dictating what lawful content readers can see – and it extends that protection regardless of the reader’s age. Though well-intentioned, California’s internet age restriction law is unconstitutional and the court of appeals should affirm the decision to block it.”
MrGuvernment said:
^^ this, Airports and a certain radius, literally have their own laws, they can basically do what ever they want.

The is why, even though i do not keep much on my phone, Signal - I delete it before I travel entirely. Leave usual apps I might use, like LinkedIn, I do not use any other social media sites, nor do I use apps on my phone for them, couple other apps on my phone, Oura Ring, Di.fm for music, couple local apps for my area, but nothing that would have something that might raise questions.

I guess I am just not one to rely on my phone for my day to day life, so it has minimal stuff on it.

But even then, i clear all browser history and cache on some apps, just in case.
Click to expand...
This reason this GrapheneOS situation is silly is because there are so many ways around this. What if I just store all my data on my own personal NAS at home? Give the cop a special login code and it doesn't technically erase the data, but stores it in some other location. Better yet, the only way to access that data is to be physically in front of the machine which would generate a new verification code that can only be seen in person. Signal is a good example where just deleting it before you travel would prevent this problem. Better yet, travel with a different phone entirely.

And yea, I don't depend on my phone for my daily life. I don't use my phone to do banking, and I don't do any real web browsing on my phone. I certainly don't use it to pay at the store. Some people look at me and wonder why a tech guy isn't using this tech, and the answer is because I know what kind of Pandora's box I'd open if I use my phone for any serious work. I don't want Google and Apple to have access to anything that can be used against me.
 
Exactly, so many ways around it, but we know most people do not think about it. When we had to fly back from Central America, and had to go through the U.S, we had a group signal chat and we had our share of Trump meme's in it, made sure that chat was deleted entirely, just in case!

Will be interesting to see how it goes in Cali, but to me this is just one step, they will try, if it fails, they will tone it down, back off, then try again later either the same, or worded differently to add-on later.
 
MrGuvernment said:
Exactly, so many ways around it, but we know most people do not think about it. When we had to fly back from Central America, and had to go through the U.S, we had a group signal chat and we had our share of Trump meme's in it, made sure that chat was deleted entirely, just in case!
Click to expand...
There was a person who got in trouble sharing JD Vance memes at the airport and was sent back. Department of Homeland Security says it was for drug use now. If I travel then it's not with my main phone. The orwellian stuff is getting out of hand.
Will be interesting to see how it goes in Cali, but to me this is just one step, they will try, if it fails, they will tone it down, back off, then try again later either the same, or worded differently to add-on later.
Click to expand...
That's the game. Try again with flowers and rainbows. They'll try something new because this isn't about the children. They want to track you online.
 
DukenukemX said:
There was a person who got in trouble sharing JD Vance memes at the airport and was sent back. Department of Homeland Security says it was for drug use now. If I travel then it's not with my main phone. The orwellian stuff is getting out of hand.

That's the game. Try again with flowers and rainbows. They'll try something new because this isn't about the children. They want to track you online.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and we basically can't do crap about it. Try to go after them for not letting you in the country, good luck...
 
DukenukemX said:
This reason this GrapheneOS situation is silly is because there are so many ways around this. What if I just store all my data on my own personal NAS at home? Give the cop a special login code and it doesn't technically erase the data, but stores it in some other location. Better yet, the only way to access that data is to be physically in front of the machine which would generate a new verification code that can only be seen in person. Signal is a good example where just deleting it before you travel would prevent this problem. Better yet, travel with a different phone entirely.

And yea, I don't depend on my phone for my daily life. I don't use my phone to do banking, and I don't do any real web browsing on my phone. I certainly don't use it to pay at the store. Some people look at me and wonder why a tech guy isn't using this tech, and the answer is because I know what kind of Pandora's box I'd open if I use my phone for any serious work. I don't want Google and Apple to have access to anything that can be used against me.
Click to expand...

If I had to travel to the US today I'd simply back up my phone locally, wipe it, load the basics and then go. I'd wait until I'm in the country and then login to my email and other things. Then before I leave I'd wipe it all again. With how easy backups and restores are these days it isn't that big a deal.
 
If you have anything compromising on your phone that you carry with you anywhere, then you have already failed.
I don't care what OS you are running; the apps you install leach data like blood, it is inherently compromised the second you connect it to a cell tower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top