[camelNotation]

That isn't the failure of warrants, our rights, or any other aspect of the legal process. That's a failure of law enforcement. They can't break encryption, sure, but they also can't read the private thoughts of individuals - yet somehow they've figured out ways to get the information they need most of the time.

A great solution in many of these cases would be to work alongside companies like Apple to implement more products like Face ID. With Face ID, they can take a few pictures of a person, 3D model their face, open the phone. It's an easy thing with the right resources. It's a technological equivalent of interrogation. The same can be done in other contexts, they just need better hackers, better investigators, and more resources on their side.

[txru]

What you posit with interrogated Face ID is a method of hacking encryption. You've provided a backdoor, that is the person's face. Previously the suspect's phone was encrypted, now the encryption is broken against the suspect's intent. A warrant was used to break the encryption.

Do you see what I'm getting at? You came up with warrant-breakable encryption, but didn't call it that. This is why it's not an easy question-- the solutions are nuanced, and some are a lot uglier than others.

[sailfast]

Maybe? There's a huge distinction between warrant-breakable encryption as a default (because it's easier) and enforcing that nobody can encrypt data unless it's encrypted using biometric data (or other information that is available outside the head of a user)

[soulofmischief]

Furthermore, there was a falsehood of security to begin with. You shouldn't legally be able to say the data is safe when it isn't safe to anyone with a couple photographs.

[saagarjha]

> With Face ID, they can take a few pictures of a person, 3D model their face, open the phone.

Note that Face ID is intended to be resistant to this kind of attack.

[camelNotation]

Sure, but the only way to build resistance to it is to expect more detail in the scan and they can't do that without making the system less convenient for people who grow a beard, wear sunglasses, etc. It can't go pore by pore on the person's face anyway, the infrared scanning process where it projects dots onto the face just isn't that advanced. It might be resistant, but it's hardly a challenge to someone with government levels of resources.

[saagarjha]

Again, as far as I am aware, Face ID is intended to be secure against concerted effort to break it. I have not heard of anyone coming up with a serious attack against it, though I'm curious to hear if you have.