Government Agencies Can Now Unlock Your Phone Using Your Face or Fingerprint in a "Search and Seizure"
A recent raid on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson has left many wondering about the extent to which government agencies can access their personal devices. According to a search warrant obtained by The Intercept, law enforcement personnel were given permission to attempt to bypass biometric authentication methods, such as fingerprint or facial recognition, in order to unlock Natanson's phone.
The warrant specifically authorized investigators to use Natanson's face or fingers to unlock her device, even though she had not provided any information about the type of biometric authentication used on her devices. This raises significant concerns about individual privacy and the potential for government overreach.
Andrew Crocker, surveillance litigation director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, notes that this is a disturbing development in the ongoing struggle against government surveillance. "Biometric unlocking can be a form of 'testimony' that is protected by the 5th Amendment," he said, highlighting the need for greater protection of individuals' constitutional rights.
Experts advise journalists to disable biometrics on their devices when they are at risk of being searched, such as during protests or border crossings. Instead, they recommend using alphanumeric passcodes, which can be more secure than fingerprint or facial recognition methods.
The recent raid on Natanson's home serves as a stark reminder of the need for vigilance in protecting our personal information and digital rights. As one expert noted, "It’s safer to unlock your devices using an alphanumeric passphrase."
A recent raid on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson has left many wondering about the extent to which government agencies can access their personal devices. According to a search warrant obtained by The Intercept, law enforcement personnel were given permission to attempt to bypass biometric authentication methods, such as fingerprint or facial recognition, in order to unlock Natanson's phone.
The warrant specifically authorized investigators to use Natanson's face or fingers to unlock her device, even though she had not provided any information about the type of biometric authentication used on her devices. This raises significant concerns about individual privacy and the potential for government overreach.
Andrew Crocker, surveillance litigation director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, notes that this is a disturbing development in the ongoing struggle against government surveillance. "Biometric unlocking can be a form of 'testimony' that is protected by the 5th Amendment," he said, highlighting the need for greater protection of individuals' constitutional rights.
Experts advise journalists to disable biometrics on their devices when they are at risk of being searched, such as during protests or border crossings. Instead, they recommend using alphanumeric passcodes, which can be more secure than fingerprint or facial recognition methods.
The recent raid on Natanson's home serves as a stark reminder of the need for vigilance in protecting our personal information and digital rights. As one expert noted, "It’s safer to unlock your devices using an alphanumeric passphrase."
]
]
]
️]
this is some crazy stuff... I mean, we're living in times where govt agencies can basically just walk into someone's home and try to hack their phone without so much as a warrant being required 
. It's like something straight out of a spy movie. And the fact that they didn't even need Hannah Natanson's consent to try and bypass her biometric authentication is just plain unsettling 
. If the government needs to access someone's phone or device, shouldn't they have to go through proper channels first? It seems like this kind of thing is just a recipe for abuse and overreach 
. I mean, I get that governments need to investigate crimes and whatnot, but this level of access to our personal info is just not right. I remember when the big deal was with AOL's password crunching fiasco back in 2001 
, now we're facing biometric hacking? It's like, can't we just keep our devices secure already? 
. I guess it's all about finding new ways to snoop around online without leaving a trail 
.
. Maybe we can start by just being more mindful of what info we share online and taking steps to secure our devices 
.
. And what's with the lack of transparency about what biometric info they need? It's like, "Hey, we're gonna try to unlock your phone... or not" 
. This is some serious Big Brother vibes, and I don't think it's cool at all 
. We need to start using more secure methods, like alphanumeric passcodes, stat 
I mean, I get it, security is important but come on! You can't just try to bypass our biometric stuff without asking first 
like we r living in some dystopian novel. cant believe they dont care about our privacy anymore its like they think we r just a bunch of sheep who will just walk around w/ ur faces & fingers out in public for anyone 2 see lol no way ppl need 2 be protected 4 real. 
it's like, totally not secure anymore. i mean i get it govts need to do their thing but this is just too much power 
. can we pls just stick with alphanumeric passcodes? 
. Experts are right, though - we need to be extra careful about disabling biometrics when we're in sensitive situations. I'm definitely going to make sure my phone is set to alphanumeric mode from now on 
. It's a small thing, but it's better to be safe than sorry! 
It's always better to be safe than sorry, especially in these times. 
And what about people who are in hiding from bad guys? Do they have no other way out? This is some serious Big Brother stuff...
It's like they're just waiting for someone to slip up and then BAM! 
It's just another way for the government to monitor us without us even knowing it 
.