Overview
- GrapheneOS claims its software is fully legal and constitutionally safeguarded, following the first U.S. prosecution related to one of its features.
- Atlanta activist Samuel Tunick asserts that the charges against him are intended to dissuade individuals from safeguarding their data.
- Tunick's public defender noted that authorities could have obtained a warrant but chose not to, and that this statute has only been previously utilized once.
GrapheneOS, a privacy-focused software company, has asserted that its smartphone operating system is "completely legal" and constitutionally protected, as it faces its first U.S. prosecution involving one of its features. On July 27, the project stated on Twitter, "We have no obligation to weaken any of the security protections it provides," emphasizing that any laws requiring such actions would be unconstitutional.
This declaration followed a conversation regarding the prosecution, where a user inquired if the project was refusing to cooperate with Homeland Security. GrapheneOS responded that it was unable to assist once critical data is erased, stating, "there's nothing we can do to assist with it," and that bypassing encryption is inherently impossible due to the design.
GrapheneOS is completely legal. We have no obligation to weaken any of the security protections it provides. Creating and using GrapheneOS is strongly protected by the US constitution. Laws attempting to make it illegal or require weakening the security would be unconstitutional.
— GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS) July 27, 2026
Samuel Tunick, an activist from Atlanta, is facing charges under 18 U.S.C. § 2232 after reportedly entering a duress code that wiped his Google Pixel during a border search without a warrant in January 2025. He has pleaded not guilty and could face a maximum of five years in federal prison. A ruling on his motion to suppress evidence is anticipated by the end of October.
Charges Designed to Intimidate
Tunick expressed to 404 Media that the prosecution aims to intimidate others from protecting their data. He believes the government is attempting to establish a precedent that undermines the right to privacy. Tunick also described enduring a year of surveillance prior to his indictment, which included having a tracker placed on his car and receiving subpoenas for his phone and Gmail records.
Matthew Dodge, Tunick's federal public defender, stated that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officers had contacted the airport in advance, requesting that Tunick be stopped and his phone searched. According to Dodge, agents searched his belongings and person against his will and found nothing, despite having the option to obtain a warrant, which they did not pursue. He noted that there has been only one other prosecution under the same statute, related to drug trafficking, labeling the current charge as "extraordinarily rare."
Government's Stance
A spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) informed 404 Media that all travelers are subject to inspection, with electronic device searches being infrequent and determined on a case-by-case basis, considering travel history and law enforcement notifications. The U.S. Attorney's Office declined to provide comments.
GrapheneOS introduced the duress PIN feature in June 2024 specifically for scenarios like Tunick's. Daniel Micay, the founder, pointed out a published overview detailing the system's defenses against unauthorized data extraction. In a tweet, GrapheneOS noted that the secure element in the Google Pixel phone, recommended by its firmware updates, only activates following owner authentication, serving as a safeguard against "state coercion."