top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 129 points 9 months ago* (21 children)

If anyone is interested in having a feature to wipe your phone, GRAPHENEOS has a duress pin option that will wipe your phone from the lock screen and leave only the OS installed. AFAIK this us only available on Google Pixel devices like the gentleman in the article had.

https://grapheneos.org/features#duress

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    My work phone has enabled "wipe if pin is wrong three times".

    I discovered after my son wiped it three times. I must though it was defective and asked for replacement

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    It'd be fascinating to see how this plays out in the courts.

    Technically it'd be the officers themselves performing the wipes, right? Could you say you got the pins mixed up in your head and get away with it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 115 points 9 months ago (19 children)

    We don't know the exact circumstances, but CBP stands for Customs and Border Protection.

    I've heard of Customs agents demanding people let them search phones without a warrant and without probable cause, and so foreigners can be refused entry. We probably all heard the story of it happening for a person who had a meme of JD Vance on his phone.

    But the article says that this guy is based out of Atlanta, so I'm guessing he's a US citizen. I'm not sure they can refuse entry to a US citizen based on this.

    Either way, you should never give permission to anybody to search your phone. Maybe you've broken a law that you didn't know was a law, and you've just handed the evidence over to the police. Or maybe you have evidence that can convict somebody else who didn't know they broke a law.

    I don't know what this means for people crossing the US border. Now is a bad time to enter the United States.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 9 months ago (15 children)

    Legally, they cannot refuse entry to a US Citizen. Legally.

    But just because someone is based in the US doesn't mean they're a citizen. And they don't need any justification to search someone, because airports and land within 100 miles of a border is a "constitution-free zone" (but not 100 miles from an airport, contrary to popular belief).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 9 months ago (12 children)

    Lmao so now we're saying all of Southern California south of Newport Beach (85 mi from Tijuana) is a place where the constitution does not apply? New York west of Rochester? (80 mi from Niagara) Pretty much all of Alaska's tail thingy next to Canada? 😂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago

    airports and land within 100 miles of a border is a "constitution-free zone"

    This isn't accurate. That's where CBP has jurisdiction to operate, but they're still bound by the constitution (for now),

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 29 points 9 months ago

    you should never give permission to anybody to search your phone

    Not only does your phone have access to all your social media accounts, email, text, phone logs, but it's also commonly used as a security device (multi factor authentication) to sign in to other accounts like your bank account, work login, etc. If you allow someone into your phone they can possibly access your work resources and that could be an even bigger problem.

    Do not let anyone have access to your phone.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 106 points 9 months ago (20 children)

    Without a warrant, CBP wasn't entitled to anything on his phone and they can go fuck themselves.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    If it was at a point of entry CBP can search electronic devices without a warrant or suspicion, for a brief time (up to 5 days) without probable cause, under the "border search exception".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 66 points 9 months ago (13 children)

    Details are weird here. The wiping occurred in Jan 2025. I found the indictment which was filed with the court on Nov 13th 2025 linked here

    We have almost no details of what happened in Jan 2025 except "Customs and Border Patrol Tactical Terrorism Response Team" was doing something with Tunick in January and Tunick "used a code" to wipe the phone. Then suddenly in November 2025 the US Government filed to have him arrested for that event.

    I'm not a legal scholar, but none of these details or timeline makes sense to me. Anyone else have any clue?

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 9 months ago (12 children)

    It's not complicated, it's Border Patrol doing their MAGA duty. The only thing we know about this case is what MAGA tells us, so it's almost all certainly a lie. Of course the details and timeline don't make sense, they are probably entirely fabricated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago (11 children)

    I don't disagree, but usually they at least try to present a semi-defensible argument. So far the only thing they elude to is "before or during a time when we were going to perform a search he wiped his own phone". If its "before" a search then what is even the basis for that being illegal for him to wipe is own property?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    I imagine they’re trying to charge him with destruction of evidence. I don’t know how that should go if this were actually a legal proceeding but would certainly hope it would require reasonable suspicion of a specific crime and a search warrant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 56 points 9 months ago (27 children)

    Always turn your phone offer before deplaning and don’t turn it back on until you’ve cleared customs. You can refuse a search and even if they take your phone they still don’t have a method of decrypting a phone that’s encrypted at rest after being turned off and all biometrics are disabled on start up until a password is entered (most phones).

    You’ll most likely lose your phone and a few hours but that’s what you have backups for.

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Reminder that Apple/Google will absolutely give law enforcement all your cloud data if presented with a warrant. I know this for a fact. Most people's phone data is synced to the cloud. Be careful out there folks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (11 children)

    *presuming you have a strong password set

    They can and still will run it through a password cracker with a dictionary provided the phone has some method of either exposing the password hash or can be bruteforced on device similar to PIN bruteforcing.

    You can refuse a search

    Which can lead to an up to 24 hour detainment which CBP has been allegedly doing, so do know the consequences.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (11 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 55 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    I'll take a "deleted data" charge. On principle.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Absolutely. Got mad "I do lots of illegal shit, but I draw the line at littering" vibes.

    Sometimes, doing the illegal thing is to do the moral thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 9 months ago

    The article is very skimpy on info. It doesn't give the circumstances of the event or anything beyond who was involved.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Was the man “Drinky” Pete Hegseth?

    Oh. Well then bullshit.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›