The US Department of Justice has charged an American with providing US border authorities with a password that wiped the contents of his phone, the indictment and media reported.
It is believed to be the first known case in the United States in which federal prosecutors have charged someone with destroying data using a so-called “duress” password embedded in the phone’s software.
according to to The GuardianAtlanta man Samuel Tunick, who covered the story earlier this week, is fighting the charges after Monday’s first court hearing. Tunick’s attorneys said U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it was illegal to seize his phone when he returned to the U.S. last year and that any evidence, including claims that his phone was wiped, should be thrown out.
The work is based on a feature included in GrapheneOS, a custom Android operating system that runs instead of software on most modern Google Pixel devices. Tunick’s lawyers confirmed that his phone was running GrapheneOS.
The software feature allows the device owner to set a password intentionally deletes the contents of that device if the user’s unlock code is entered instead.
Tunick’s case also raises lingering questions about what constitutional rights can be exercised at the border, which the U.S. government has long argued is not U.S. soil until a person is allowed to enter.
The government indictmentcontaining a typo (“United States Code”), accuses Tunick of providing border agents with a passcode that caused the phone to “erase the digital content” before the device was seized.
Tunick’s lawyers a motion to suppress evidenceclaimed that the arrest and seizure were illegal. U.S. border officials took Tunick to a secondary inspection at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson Airport on Jan. 24, 2025, when he returned from overseas, but he was repeatedly denied access to an attorney and was not informed of his legal rights, the petition says.
Tunick’s lawyers accused the government of seeking access to his phone under the pretext of looking for child abuse videos, but failed to provide evidence to support their suspicions. His motion to suppress claimed that the government was instead investigating him because of his ties to Protect the Atlanta Forest, a longtime environmental movement that opposes the development of a sprawling law enforcement training campus in Atlanta. It was called “Police City”.
Border agents argued that they did not need a warrant to search Tunik’s phone because he had not yet crossed the U.S. border, the motion said. The US government has long claimed it can to search and seize people’s devices without a search warrant or court order Until granted entry into the United States.
When Tunic provided his password and authorities entered it, “the screen went blank, flashed a few times, and the phone restarted.” Authorities seized his phone anyway before telling him he was free to go and could enter the United States.
Prosecutors later filed charges against Tunick federal law it makes it illegal to intentionally destroy or damage property to prevent the authorities from seizing it. Tunik pleaded not guilty.
Matthew Dodge, an assistant federal public defender at Tunick’s legal team, told TechCrunch that it is extremely rare for federal law to be used in an indictment.
Security experts also said that they have not come across such accusations before.
Bill Buddington, senior technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Runa Sandvik, digital security expert working to protect people at risk security consulting company Granitt told TechCrunch that they have not seen similar cases involving the use of forced passwords.
“I’ve never seen this before, although I’ve discussed the potential scenario with activists and journalists over the years,” Sandvik said. “I think this case serves as a reminder that authorities can dispute data that you intentionally destroy, so when you cross certain lines, it’s better not to have that data on you.”
“With a little planning ahead, you can always download the information you need once you get to your destination,” Sandvik said.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation There are guidelines on how to protect your information and security at the US border and what rights you have.
The Atlanta federal court overseeing the case is expected to rule on Tunick’s motion to suppress later this year. A Department of Justice spokesperson did not respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This does not affect our editorial independence.
