Court Rules that your Fingerprint is NOT Private
from
(snip)A Circuit Court judge in Virginia has ruled that fingerprints are not protected by the Fifth Amendment, a decision that has clear privacy implications for fingerprint-protected devices like newer iPhones and iPads.
According to Judge Steven C. Fucci, while a criminal defendant can't be compelled to hand over a passcode to police officers for the purpose of unlocking a cellular device, law enforcement officials can compel a defendant to give up a fingerprint.
Utterly outrageous.
A passkey is a passkey is a passkey.
But for now, as things stand today, if your cellphone (or anything else) uses a fingerprint scanner to unlock it, well, sucks to be you because you can be compelled to allow the use of your finger for that purpose.
Slowly but surely we are having what's left of the Constitution turned into toilet paper.(snip)
This is of obvious potential interest to escorts, dancers, camgirls etc. ... whose cell phones, laptops, etc. may potentially contain 'incriminating' evidence.
Re: Court Rules that your Fingerprint is NOT Private
Sucks sweaty balls...
Im burning off my fingerprints as we speak....
Im joking but...worst case scenario...shut down your phone - then it requires you to use passcode upon start up (im keeping my fingerprint/touch id its way faster and my add kicks in too easy)
I think this is unfortunate because as technology expands the benefits for using fingerprint scanning are great. Guess they can open up your safes or door locks that have fingerprint scanning or is this law for mobile devices?
Re: Court Rules that your Fingerprint is NOT Private
I think that since recent rulings have declared cops need a warrant to search a cell phone this has little practical significance.
To rule otherwise would mean endless delays in simply processing an arrested prisoner.
So,as I see it right now, you must give your fingerprints[as it always has been] and if it happens to be your cell phone passcode, they will need a warrant to open your cellphone, and in that case they will have gained the right to use your fingerprint that they already have.........
Re: Court Rules that your Fingerprint is NOT Private
I wonder what percentage of people are already in the system - and have their fingerprints archived for access anyways. Im pretty sure if they really wanted access into someones device they can just hire someone to hack it.
Re: Court Rules that your Fingerprint is NOT Private
^^^ all of that is true, but it still makes an 'end run' around American's ( supposed ) rights against unreasonable search and against self-incrimination.
In regard to a warrant actually being required to search a cell phone, there is a legal loophole which exists that is large enough to drive a SWAT vehicle through ...
(snip)they can also search a cell phone or other electronic devices in a suspect's possession when arrested. The police may also search your home or car without a warrant if they have probable cause and believe that you will destroy the evidence of a crime before a judge can issue a warrant.(snip)
... with that loophole being the supposed belief on the part of LE that 'evidence of a crime' might be destroyed ( I.e. cell phone call history / text messages deleted ) before a search warrant can be obtained. Combine that with the 'compulsory fingerprint' passcode court ruling and Americans have effectively lost their ( supposed ) 5th amendment right to 'remain silent' when asked / ordered to provide that passcode.
Quote:
Im pretty sure if they really wanted access into someones device they can just hire someone to hack it.
Actually, for this to be done legally it would require both a search warrant and a court order ... with a fairly high burden of proof being placed on LE before that court order would ever be issued.
Re: Court Rules that your Fingerprint is NOT Private
Best court money can buy, the Citizens United decision was the harbinger of the future!