🎥 Video Link

Transcript

Transcript

Please excuse any grammatical errors. I used a tool to generate the transcript and haven’t had a chance to read through it yet.

So today what I want to talk about is the case of United States versus Tunick. This is regarding the use of the duress pin on Graphene OS. I thought we could start off by just reading the official indictment against Tunick before covering some other nuances in this case.

So on or about January 24th, 2025, in the Northern District of Georgia, the defendant Samuel Tunick, before and during the search for and seizure of property by Customs and Border Patrol Tactical Terrorism Response Team, Supervisory Officer L.CDOT, a person authorized to make such search and seizure, did knowingly destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, and otherwise take any action to delete the digital contents of a Google Pixel cellular phone for the purpose of preventing and impairing the government’s lawful authority to take said property into its custody and control in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2232A.

So the first thing I want to say about this is regarding the knowingly destroy, damage, waste of, dispose, delete digital contents part. The way the duress pin works on Graphene OS is when you enter that pin, it initiates the sequence, which deletes the keys that are used to decrypt the data on the device. Those keys are used to decrypt the data on your device when you correctly enter the pin and they’re stored on the secure element.

So it’s the keys that were deleted on the device, not the actual data. For all intents and purposes, that data is now permanently inaccessible, but the data was not actually deleted. Again, like I said, this is a very nuanced point, but the law loves nuances.

I was trying to think of a good analogy for this. So imagine the lock you have on your house. You insert the key, you open the lock, you can access your home’s contents. Entering the duress pin is equivalent to changing the pins on the tumbler inside the lock on the door. So now when you insert the key into the lock, the key no longer works because the pins have changed. At that point you can’t access your home, but everything inside is just as you left it. It’s just the key no longer works.

I’m not a lawyer, but that doesn’t sound like it was destroyed. I guess we’ll see how that plays out. So that’s the initial indictment. I’ll link this down below if you want to keep up with the court case. The latest item was released on July 20th, 2026.

But at this point there’s been a bunch of articles published on this topic, and the first one I want to talk about is one from Ars Technica. So in early 2025, like we saw in the initial indictment, Atlanta resident Samuel Tunick was on his way home following a trip abroad. After landing in the U.S., customs agents demanded access to his Pixel phone, which was running an alternative version of Android called Graphene OS.

And rather than handing over his data, Tunick used a clever feature of the software to delete everything, which again is the duress pin. He actually told the border patrol agents his duress pin, they entered it, and the data was erased.

During their interrogation, CBP agents told Tunick they wanted to search his phone for evidence of child sexual abuse, and if he didn’t unlock the device, it would be confiscated. Unless you are the Catholic priest from the town where I grew up who was charged and convicted of possession of CSAM—you know what they say, it’s always the ones you most suspect—then these types of searches for everyday individuals are usually just fishing expeditions.

It’s an excuse to protect the children, like we’ve heard dozens of times, and the thing that kind of backs that up is this is what CBP told him, but it turns out it’s because he was part of a group called Defend the Atlanta Forest, which opposed the construction of an enormous law enforcement training facility in the area, often known as Cop City. So this is what actually landed him on a list and got him detained at the airport.

But it just kind of makes me laugh that they followed the typical procedure of accusing someone of possessing CSAM, and that’s why they’re doing the search, and in order to protect the children, please unlock your device.

Tunick also claims he was never read his rights and requested legal counsel several times, but the requests were denied. He was at a border area. He was re-entering the U.S., and a lot of rights are sort of in a legal gray zone at that point, which is why they can conduct these warrantless search and seizures.

The other article which has some great points is one from 404 Media. If you haven’t heard of them before, check them out. They put out some really good content.

The agents tried to rig this game by making this all come to a head at the airport, he added. Ordinarily, authorities would need a warrant to search the contents of someone’s phone, but at an airport, those protections often do not apply. They could have asked a judge for a search warrant for Sam’s phone if they thought they had evidence for a crime. They didn’t do that.

CBP said all travelers are subject to inspection and ensure compliance with the U.S. laws. These inspections, including questioning and rare search of electronic devices, are conducted on a case-by-case basis, taking into account factors such as travel history and law enforcement alerts.

And speaking of those alerts, Department of Homeland Security, also known as DHS, called the airport ahead, said Tunick was coming through, and asked officers to stop him. “We want you to get his phone and search his phone,” the officers said.

So a lot of this keeps going back to Graphene OS, the use of the duress pin, which I think is great. It’s a fantastic feature. I think it’s also worth remembering that the reason Tunick is in this situation is because he legally participated in a protest, which happened to land him on a list that got him stopped at the airport.

So while some protests will get you on a list that gets you detained, other protests, at least I think it was a protest, will get you a presidential pardon.

Regardless, if you’re in the United States, I think this video from the Pot Brothers at Law has some really good advice if you are detained.

And they ask more questions? Am I being detained or am I free to go? And if detained, what do you say? I invoke the fifth. And then what do you do? You shut the fuck up.

Now, whether or not you should enter the duress pin if you are detained, I guess we’ll see how this case goes and see if it is a legal thing to do. Again, if you want to keep up with the case, I will link this down below so you can check for updates.

I do think this is one of the most important cases when it comes to privacy in recent years. So I’m extremely curious to see how this goes. When there are updates, I will make some future videos on it. But until then, hope you have a great rest of your day, and I’ll see you next time.