Prosecutors claim Tunick’s actions constituted a deliberate attempt to destroy evidence, while his defense argues that the search violated his constitutional rights. Tunick’s phone operated on GrapheneOS, which includes a feature that can erase data upon entering a specific passcode. The case has drawn attention to the legal status of privacy software, with GrapheneOS asserting its legality and emphasizing its role in protecting user data from unauthorized access. Cybersecurity experts express concern over the implications of treating such software as inherently suspicious.