this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2026
262 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

86580 readers
3506 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
262
US accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a 'duress' password during border search (techcrunch.com)
submitted 14 hours ago by madeindex@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/49853131

Feels to me like GrapheneOS did exactly what it should, passing the US border test with flying colours!

Funny part about this lawsuit: “With a little planning ahead of time, you can always download the data you need once you get to where you’re going,”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] chillpanzee@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Perfectly legal. Unless they were legally charged and ordered by a court to preserve data considered to be used in a crime, they can’t be charged with shit. Cops don’t dictate this, courts do, AND that scope only applies to an active prosecution anyway.

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not arguing that you're wrong here, but the article describes the federal law the journalist was charged with. It seems very broad, and it's a bullshit law, but from what's here, it seems more grey area than perfectly legal. All of 2232 seems to require knowledge (which it seems like he had, but might be arguable) and action. You could argue that the journalist didn't take any affirmative action to wipe the phone. The action that wiped it was the feds entering a code.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago

Yeah, you're wrong in a number of different ways. No, you're not a lawyer.

What you linked to is precedent par notice. Every single subordinate literally mentions notice.

A law enforcement officer of ANY type is not able able to issue that notice.