Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors
I read the article “Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors” for the magazine Forensics on the Scene and in the Lab. The article covered recent court rulings on whether or not the touch ID feature on older versions of the IPhone are covered by the fifth amendment rights or not. The 5th amendment prevents suspects from incriminating themselves by answering questions in a court of law or artifacts at the scene of a crime that are not covered by a police warrant. For example, in a court of law, no one is required to give the personal password to a smart device. Companies will not turn over customer information either, but if a police/ investigative team wishes to crack the combo they are permitted to under the law. A difference in the touch ID feature, is that “Touch ID and similar technologies have made fingerprints akin to a key,” the filing said. “Instead of carrying that key on a metal ring, Apple users now carry five potential keys on each hand.” This information was connecting back to a child pronography case, where authorities asked the residents of the house/ alleged criminals to open all IPads and IPhones in the house to search for footage. This piece of evidence was brought up by the defense attorney to the judge claiming that it was a violation of fifth amendment rights and that anything discovered on the devices should be thrown out. This situation and question is now being discussed by judges in different districts, trying to determine whether or not it was a violation of fifth amendment rights, and if the court of law needs to create any amendments to the law to include touch ID with protection.
This article was a very important conversation to be brought to the public's attention. With the rapid increase in technologies advancements, our courts need to be amending laws to accommodate for these advancements. With new technology coming out every few months, the government needs to create a bureau or cabinet of lawyers, judges, and officials to oversee how these technologies can impact criminal procedures in a court of law so that law enforcement officials do not throw out evidence based upon misconduct. Personally I think that technologies such as touch ID and passwords should be rightfully protected under the law and by major companies such as Apple, Microsoft, and Android. In other court cases we have seen Apple stand by their customer contacts and have not breached these when pressured by courts, which I find very comforting. I also think that it is very important for upcoming generations to know that laws will start adapting to changing times, and will mold to protect a growing community influenced and interconnected with technology.
Overall I found the article very informative. I though the overall message was well developed and the examples were helpful but it was relatively short. Though the story was written today, I am intrigued to see if the writer will follow up on upcoming news and findings regarding this court case and what conclusion is drawn about touch ID protection under the law.
Lucy Rizzo
Lucy Rizzo
October 18, 2017
Forensics
Current Event #5
3 comments:
Catherine Faville
Forensics
Current event #5
I really enjoyed Lucy’s review of the article “ Case reveals legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with Iphone Sensors” written by the magazine Forensics on the scene and in the Lab. She did a really good job with analyzing and describing in immense detail discussing the issue if the IPhone and its fingerprint data analysis is in fact covered by the fifth amendment rights. She did a good job of capturing the reader in order to get them interested in the article, along with her good hook she brought in other information about the fifth amendment in order to bring more information to the issue. Her display of statistics made it informative and interesting to read, she also did a good job in explaining the relevents in modern day society and how this events effects it.
However i believe her review could have benefited if she added more outside information to the review, it would have given me for information and to understand the issue and the article more clearly. It aldo would have been nice if she added her own personal opinion to the review, it was more of a plane review of the article, rather than a well thought out review with insightful comments attached to it. If she would have added this component, it would have made the article another aspect.
This article surprised me, it never occurred to me that something i use everyday could actually inflict with my personal information and rights. It made me more aware of a issue i did not take into account before, with new advancements of technology, i feel as though the law has to advance as well in order to protect the public.
I thought that Lucy did an excellent job on her review of “Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors,” as she was very thorough in the points which she made. I thought that she was able to summarize the article while incorporating many details to better help understand the topic very well. Lucy also did a good job in connecting the issue with the use of fingerprint identification on smartphones to everyday life and explaining the risks of rapidly advancing technology. She did a good job with how she incorporated examples of cases where fingerprint ID was used in order to take advantage of the situation.
Although Lucy’s article was very informative, there were a few aspects which could have been added to the review in order to improve it. I thought that if she had included more about her position on the situation, it would have made her review stronger. Also, I thought that if she had incorporated more about how it can affect court cases as well as discuss in more detail possible solutions.
Lucy’s review of “Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors,” was very interesting and informative to read. Prior to reading her review of the article, I was not fully aware of the difficulty touch ID can cause for court cases. From reading Lucy’s article I became better informed on how the advancing technology, such as fingerprint ID on smartphones, affects our society as well as the many risks that come with it.
Lucy’s current event was a very interesting read. Lucy wrote about the article “Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors” written by Michael Tarm for the Associated Press. The article talks about the fifth amendment, and its connection to touch ID. Passwords are protected, but the issue of touch ID is in the air. The first that that shocked me was that I thought touch ID would be apart of the fifth amendment, due to it being your own fingerprints. I also thought it was surprising that the issue is just being taken up. TouchID was made on apple iphones starting in 2013. I thought that almost five years later there would be a solution to this problem. Finally, I really liked how lucy stated the importance of this case to the world we’re living in today.
Although lucy did an amazing job on her review, there were two things that she could've done to make the reader understand the article a bit better. First, thing she could add was put a little more information into the actual case that this issue was being discussed in. She said what the case was about, but not about any specifics in the case or the outcome of it. Lastly, she could've added some more quotes.
Im very glad I read this article because I think it is very important to talk about. With advancing technology it only makes sense that our laws advance with it and allow detailed and outlined protections. I will be looking into this case, and issue more to see what the outcome is like.
Tarm, Michael. “Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with IPhone Sensors.” Forensic Magazine, Associated Press, 18 Oct. 2017, www.forensicmag.com/news/2017/10/case-reveals-legal-rules-thumb-tricky-iphone-sensors.
Post a Comment