Facial recognition causing issues for law enforcement IPhone X(R)

It appears Apple is yet again catching the ire of law enforcement over Face ID and fears of it looking them out.
Engadget Linky

Police have yet to completely wrap their heads around modern iPhones like the X and XS, and that's clearer than ever thanks to a leak. Motherboard has obtained a presentation slide from forensics company Elcomsoft telling law enforcement to avoid looking at iPhones with Face ID. If they gaze at it too many times (five), the company said, they risk being locked out much like Apple's Craig Federighi was during the iPhone X launch event. They'd then have to enter a passcode that they likely can't obtain under the US Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which protects suspects from having to provide self-incriminating testimony. There are ways around this system, whether or not they're ethically sound -- the FBI recently forced a suspect to unlock his iPhone X using Face ID. Some warrants can explicitly offer permission to use face unlocking. Many investigators won't know about the alternatives, though, and there won't always be an option to use the accused person's face. There's no guarantee other countries will allow forced face recognition, either.

I hadn’t thought about the issue before but it seems it’s already causing waves in law enforcement, be worried if you see LEOs putting tape over your beloved “notch” to keep from inadvertently causing a lock out.

a reply to: BigDave-AR

A double-edged sword.

Some people probably being rightfully protected, others are gaming the system.

If police need to get into my phone all they need to do is flip it open like it's 2003.

They'll be laughing at me and I'll be wishing I had iPhone X.

Well thats the fun part of all this, the US has laws in place that basically say its illegal for anyone to even attempt at breaking encryption, or to develop tools for such a purpose. The government where trying to apply pressure on Apple to 'allow' them to not have to break encryption. Truth was that the most probable story was that, yeah they had already broken into the phones in question but didn't want to appear to have broken the law, so they wanted apple to sort of greenlight it and take the flack... in the end... they claimed an offshore tech company broke the encryption... yeaaaah... right

People then get all "Oh but its to stop terroists" when they want to get into your phone... and then simultaneously and unironically quote the constitution while also wanting to break it... because... it doesn't apply to people we don't like apparently.

I find it rather amusing as an outsider when the constitution is often spouted as some holy writ... and then it kind of boils down to typically.

Keep the 2nd amendment...except, you know, for undesirables of certain religious backgrounds or skin colour (breaking the 1st)
Keep the 4th amendment... that practically doesn't apply... to certain religious backgrounds or skin colour... because... reasons (also breaking the 1st)
Meh... the 5th, you know... like... no smoke without fire, why wouldn't you want a government official to look at your phone, hey, you not wanting to possibly incrimiate yourself is proof you are bad...

Oh wait... yeah, this constitution is not believed in...like... at all... except for the guns part, yay guns.