www.bloomberg.com
By Kartikay Mehrotra 
The FBI’s feud with Apple over access to Syed Farook’s iPhone might 
never have happened if the San Bernardino, Calif., shooter had been 
carrying a 5S or newer. For the 250 million phones sold around the world
 with fingerprint authentication since 2013, law enforcement may be able
 to compel suspects to press their fingers to the devices and unlock 
them.
With minimal litigation on the books in the U.S., police and prosecutors
 require only a judge’s blessing on a warrant for a suspect’s 
fingerprints. So far they’ve used the power sparingly. But as the number
 of fingerprint scanners in hip pockets grows, district attorneys across
 the country say the technology is poised to become a major engine of 
evidence-gathering. “It is likely to be just a matter of time till this 
does become a primary gateway to accessing phones,” says Micheal 
O’Connor, an Alameda County assistant district attorney in Oakland, 
Calif.
If a person has enabled Apple’s Touch ID, her fingerprint will unlock 
the phone for 48 hours after locking before the device requires a PIN. 
Systems on newish Samsung and LG phones work similarly. Los Angeles and 
Oakland are among the cities that have already granted or received 
warrants for the use of a finger to unlock a phone. The next step may be
 a lawsuit that determines whether a fingerprint is off-limits.
Legal scholars say law enforcement is likely to win that fight. Two 
years ago, David Baust, a paramedic in Virginia Beach, Va., admitted 
that his locked iPhone 5S may have filmed him in bed strangling his 
girlfriend, according to a court filing. Baust’s lawyers argued that 
unlocking the phone would violate his Fifth Amendment right to avoid 
incriminating himself. A state judge ruled that demanding Baust type in 
his pass code would entail a “mental process” leading to 
self-incrimination, but that asking for his fingerprint was more like 
drawing a blood sample and therefore OK.
Although the Virginia decision isn’t binding on other judges, it’s only a
 matter of time before a higher court weighs in and sets a precedent, 
says Rahul Gupta, a senior deputy district attorney in Orange County, 
Calif. He, too, is betting on police and prosecutors. “It’s just the 
same old evidence, blood or a mouth swab, being used in a different 
way,” he says.
Fingerprint-scanning phones will become the majority within about two 
years, estimates researcher IDC. As the pile of warrant requests grows, 
the pressure will be on magistrate judges to draw a line between genuine
 seizures and fishing expeditions, says Leslie Harris, a lecturer at the
 University of California at Berkeley’s School of Information. “They 
could be the last line of defense,” says Harris, who’s also president of
 the Harris Strategy Group, a think tank that advocates for privacy 
rights. “And they often get calls in the dead of night that force them 
to make immediate decisions. It’s not an ideal situation.”
The fingerprint lock systems, as they stand, though, aren’t foolproof
 skeleton keys for law enforcement. When the phone is switched off and 
restarted, it requires a pass code. And it won’t take long for criminals
 to learn that the little scanner on the home button isn’t their friend.
The bottom line: Fingerprint locks, which will be the norm in two years, give law enforcement an end run around smartphone encryption.
 
 

 
