FB pixel

U.S. judge allows law enforcement to compel suspect to unlock smartphone with biometrics

 

A U.S. federal district court judge in Massachusetts has ruled that agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) can force people to unlock their smartphones with fingerprint biometrics in the execution of a search warrant, The Register reports.

Judge Judith Dein approved the warrant to search the property of a suspected firearms trafficker, including any iPhone found at his Boston apartment. Three of ten paragraphs in the warrant relate to the suspect’s Apple device and the authorization of law enforcement to try his fingers on any iPhone which may belong to him.

The affidavit notes that communications with cell phones are among the evidence that led to the identification of the suspect, and that his iPhone could therefore reasonably be expected to contain evidence of illegal activity. The officer providing the affidavit also points out that the biometric unlocking method is necessary because otherwise the device can only be unlocked with the password, which the suspect would have to voluntarily provide. Passwords are considered potentially self-incriminating testimony, and therefore are protected by the Fifth Amendment, which led a forensics consultancy to advise law enforcement to try to preserve the possibility of biometric unlocking for seized devices last year.

A California judge recently ruled that U.S. police cannot compel people to unlock devices with their facial or fingerprint biometrics, arguing that biometrics are equivalent to the physiological responses of lie-detector tests, which are considered testimony. A similar point was made in a 2017 ruling in an Illinois federal court case.

The Register reports, however, that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled last month that a password is not testimony, as neither it nor the contents of the device it unlocks constitutes new information. In that case, Justice Barbara Lenk, while agreeing with the decision, warned that “the court’s decision today sounds the death knell for a constitutional protection against compelled self incrimination in the digital age.”

Previous court decisions have been split on whether passwords are testimony, and whether biometrics are equivalent to passwords in this sense, suggesting that ultimately, the questions will have to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

Article Topics

 |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Anticipation for Metalenz and Samsung’s answer to Face ID mounts

After Samsung and Metalenz collaborated to incorporate Samsung’s Isocell Vision 931 image sensor into Metalenz’s Polar ID imaging technology, Mashable…

 

Germany beefs up border security ahead of UEFA Championship

Germany has been ramping up security measures such as border checks and CCTV surveillance in preparation UEFA European Football Championship…

 

Inverid and Cybernetica team up to secure digital ID, signatures with biometric MFA

A new partnership has been formed by Inverid and Cybernetica to combine the NFC ID document-scanning capabilities of the former…

 

Vision-Box unveils new Service Design platform for travel experience enhancement

Vision-Box, an Amadeus company known for its biometrics-based travel offerings, has introduced its latest service innovation: Service Design, which aims…

 

Moldova’s first digital ID app sees 24K downloads in five days

Moldova’s first digital identity wallet was downloaded over 24,000 times within the first five days, causing temporary glitches due to…

 

Australia and Japan showcase cross-border verifiable credentials

In recent years, Australia and Japan have both launched digital identity initiatives allowing their citizens to verify themselves online. The…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most Read This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events