I wish there were a nice quick way to do lockdown on an Android phone. Right now you have to hold down the power button and tap the lockdown button on screen. Which requires you to pull out your phone and is completely obvious.
Shoot, even a time based lockdown, so like if you don't use biometrics in the last hour or whatever, then you must use your passphrase. Or any other number of logic conditions like location, wifi connect, finger used...
i believe this apple update was introduced after the court which ruled that it is ok to force you to unlock with the fingerprint, but not ok to demand the pin.
there was a case when police wanted to unlock a gangster's girlfriend iphone.
Android has ROMs that have stronger features, but basic Android is lacking in this area.
E.g. CalyxOS allows you to put the phone in "Before First Unlock" mode. In which even if extracted only has system data, not user data.
GrapheneOS uses even stronger protections, it lock downs the whole kernel.
You can set up the thing to lock on a schedule for one minute. If you don't mind being locked out for a minute occasionally while you're using your phone, it effectively means that if enough time passes your phone will have locked and you'll need to use your passphrase.
Edit: anyway the existence of this function means it's possible to write an app that does what you want.
The US Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination does not prohibit police officers from forcing a suspect to unlock a phone with a thumbprint scan, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday.
The ruling does not apply to all cases in which biometrics are used to unlock an electronic device but is a significant decision in an unsettled area of the law.
Judges rejected his claim, holding "that the compelled use of Payne's thumb to unlock his phone (which he had already identified for the officers) required no cognitive exertion, placing it firmly in the same category as a blood draw or fingerprint taken at booking."
Payne conceded that "the use of biometrics to open an electronic device is akin to providing a physical key to a safe" but argued it is still a testimonial act because it "simultaneously confirm[s] ownership and authentication of its contents," the court said.
The Supreme Court "held that this was not a testimonial production, reasoning that the signing of the forms related no information about existence, control, or authenticity of the records that the bank could ultimately be forced to produce," the 9th Circuit said.
The Court held that this act of production was of a fundamentally different kind than that at issue in Doe because it was "unquestionably necessary for respondent to make extensive use of 'the contents of his own mind' in identifying the hundreds of documents responsive to the requests in the subpoena."
The original article contains 662 words, the summary contains 241 words. Saved 64%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!