Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Confiscating Data at the Border
PizzaFace writes "U.S. Customs agents have long had broad authority to examine the things a person tries to bring into the country, to prevent the importation of contraband. The agents can conduct their searches without a warrant or probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. In recent years, Customs agents have begun using their authority to insist on copying data brought to the border on laptop computers, cell phones and other devices. The government claims that this intelligence-gathering by Customs is the same as looking in a suitcase. In response the EFF is filing a lawsuit attempting to force the government to reveal its policies on border searches. 'The question of whether border agents have a right to search electronic devices at all without suspicion of a crime is already under review in the federal courts. The lawsuit was inspired by some two dozen cases, 15 of which involved searches of cellphones, laptops, MP3 players and other electronics.'"
I just have a question for any legal scholars or experts in this field:
Does the 5th ammendment apply if I have strong encryption on my laptop? Can I simply refuse to give them the passphrase, or will I end up in Gitmo?
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
It's pretty sad when Americans need to travel with blank laptops for fear of having their data seized by US border agents; in the past, that sort of thing was necessary when traveling behind the iron curtain.
It's also pointless, given that data can be stored easily and encrypted on the Internet, on flash drives (some of which are tiny), or even hidden steganographically.
Truecrypt:
1. There is no encrypted data, I just didn't format that partition yet.
2. There is no encrypted data, that file must be corrupt. What did you do to my computer?
3. Here's the encrypted data, it's a copy of my tax forms for 2006. There is no hidden partition.
Pick one.
.. things must have slipped quite far if you have to compare your country to Iran or Afghanistan in order to portray your country in a favourable light.
This (data being copied at the US border) was communicated within my organisation (one of the largest banks in the world) quite some time back. We are no longer allowed to bring work-laptops when entering the US. Meetings were rescheduled to take place in Switzerland instead (sorry people of the US - you'll just have to endure jetlag more than was previously the case).
The US is very rapidly turning into a developing country. What a pity. I do hope that you turn things around and regain the previously held title of "land of the free".
Until then, we (the rest of the world) will be forced to continue reducing our exposure to you as it has turned out to be detrimental to business, economic growth and freedom.
If they CAN refuse you entry, what happens if the country they send you back to denies you re-entry? Do you just spend the rest of your life hopping back and forth on planes until someone gives in?
I honestly, don't see how they could deny entry to a US citizen, for any reason. Can someone please clarify?
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
Good timing with the Truecrypt 5.0 release. This is search/seizure without cause and is against basic rights but this shouldn't be too big a deal. It isn't for me.
I travel with everything inside a Truecrypt hidden volume. My OS is exposed in the regular volume along with browser cache showing activity to news.google.com. That's it. The rest of the system is contained within a hidden volume.
I've been asked to turn my PC on and type in my "password" and I do so cheerfully. They see exactly what I allow them to see: The OS with browser cache to news.google.com. They seem satisfied and I get waved on.
I can play this game and I win. I'm not waiting for the courts to tell me what is/isn't right/wrong. I already know what's right/wrong. It's irrelevant (to me) how this all plays out in the courts. No thief, public or private gets my data.
-[d]-
Next time I cross the border, remind me to carry a suitcase full of DVDs full of random data labeled "one-time pad disk 1," "one time pad disk 2," etc.
Let them waste their time copying those disks.
When they ask what they are, I'll tell them the truth: They are unused one-time pads that are designed to be used to encrypt corporate data. If they ask, I will also tell them truthfully that if they leave my sight they will not be used.
Oh, I'll also include a disk that has nothing but a copy of the Bill of Rights on it, just to see if they are paying attention.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Sir, this is a despicable argument.
The point is not that the US is "better" than some dictatorship or chaotic hell-hole.
The point is that the US today is much worse than the country defined by the US Constitution and bravely won by its founding citizens.
To compare the US to a dictatorship or chaotic hell-hole is an insult to every American who has fought and died to protect the ideals of the US Constitution.
As for your right to vote, it's true that the citizens of the US have not yet been asked to relinquish it. Instead, elections are a circus of toadies funded by powerful interests. The US has been brought to its current state by people who were ~elected~. Think about that if you decide that your Constitution expresses ideals worth fighting for and even dying for.
Great people conceived the US Constitution. Brave people have defended it and died defending it. The measure of the success of the US is NOT weather it is better than some dictatorship or chaotic hell-hole. The measure of the success of the US is whether it is the nation that the Constitution intended it to be.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
The big issue here is the dangerous idea that ideas are dangerous.
Far distant dystopian future: With transporter technology, customs "copies" you at the border and keeps a copy of you in stasis for further questioning/interrogation. "You are free to go. Your copy will stay behind for questioning. Don't worry--you won't feel a thing."
I keep thinking back on a USENET posting titled The Legend of Ruritania (this may not be the official link, but is the oldest preserved copy I could quickly locate).
Because "we the people" not just let it — we demand it to, and vote out people, who are opposed to it...
When the Federal Income Tax was first introduced in 1864, it was only 3%. We are now boiled up 35% (having touched 88% in 1942) and you don't seem to scream.
So, pardon me, if I don't object to Customs Agents copying (not "confiscating") data for examination too much — they've been searching through travelers' material possessions since their "service" was introduced...
We are now facing a very real danger of Ms. Clinton getting elected — because, as analysts say, of support for her among single women, who "desperately need" the "schools, mass transit, childcare", that she promises to deliver them. What those analysts — and everyone else — omit, is that those women want all of these benefits "for free", or, as we know, at somebody else's expense.
In other words, don't accuse the government — it just follows the people's wishes...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Searching and reviewing != copying and archiving.
Let me just say, I live in a former "communist country". And this sounds exactly like the bad old days my grandparents sometimes talk about.
The way I see it, you guys are being screwed. Slowly, but oh so absolutely.
I know I won't be coming your way any time soon.
Boiling a frog, indeed.
Ignore this signature. By order.
Well, you know, they're just trying to keep us good citizens safe from outsiders bringing terrorist acts to our nation. Our borders must be secure.
... terrorists are people ... people need food, clothing, shelter ... I've got it! Since terrorists must live somewhere, we should be able to search anywhere that people live. Don't we have the right to know for sure that our neighbors aren't planning to drive a truck full of explosives into a crowded shopping mall? (Oh, yeah, I forgot shopping malls, them too.)
... really drive the message home that every citizen is a security officer ... get people pay attention to every little detail, and report things they think might be suspicious.
Of course, there might be one or two that slip through, or people already inside the borders who begin terrorist activities. We should probably do this same kind of thing at state borders, too.
And the big cities. I mean, New York has already been attacked. Chicago has the tallest building in the nation. And there are plenty of huge metropolitan areas that could be ripe targets. We should make sure that our big cities are safe.
Speaking of buildings, we should probably also conduct these searches whenever someone is entering a large building. That would certainly relieve the fears of the people who have to work in (or near!) high-rises every day.
But you don't have to enter a building to do something bad. Just being out on the street, you could have some kind of chemical or biological weapon, or a dirty bomb. (Remember Jose Padilla? We're lucky we caught him.) The police should be able to search public spaces, including the people in them, at their will. Really, you're in a public place, you should expect to be inspected.
Okay, we've got all that covered, but that's all defensive. If we really want to rid this world of the threat of terrorism, we need to go to the source. Let's see
That's going to take a lot of resources. A lot of people. We'd have to really get the citizenry on board here
Not everyone can keep that up, though. I mean, we're people! We have jobs and families! We shouldn't have to bear the burden of constant vigilance; if everyone has to give up their regular lives in order to become a police officer, the terrorists have won!
We live in an age of technology! We can develop a giant database, and fill that database with information collected by audio and video recording equipment. We can install that surveillance equipment in all those places above I've demonstrated that terrorists can be found, have them all feed into the database.
National borders, state lines, cities, public buildings, city streets, shopping malls, private homes.
In all seriousness: I would much rather live in fear of terrorism than in fear of my own government's attempts to prevent it.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
The government is a bully who says "deal with it" knowing no one will do a thing.
I'm not an American and I don't live in the US anymore but I do keep an eye on what's happening. My satellite TV is good enough to bring me "FSTV" (Free Speech TV, if you have DishNetwork its there around 9000) Last night they ran the amazing film "America: Freedom to Fascism" by Director Aaron Russo. It knocked me over and even though much of the info was not new to me the way he put it together really put a punch in it. http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ or find it on torrent. Ron Paul does a pretty good interview about the Federal Reserve.
What possibly could be a threat in data that Customs needs to confiscate it? Are Customs being used to provide data to the government? Are Customs being used to provide information for American companies? Are Customs being used just to get Americans accustomed to the idea that they have nothing private?
So if the US Customs agents make copies of all my MP3s, isn't that "stealing" the music, as defined by the RIAA? Are they going to end up paying $7,000 per song they have copied when they are brought to court??
"But this one goes to 11!"
As I recall, under long-standing International treaty and law, a nation has the right to control anything and everything that passes its borders.
Under the US constitution, the people have a right for their papers to be secure from unreasonable searches. Considering that data itself cannot be a threat to anyone, it's pretty clear that this search is unreasonable. And even if data could be a threat, there are so many ways for data to enter the country that interdiction at the border is not a reasonable strategy to stop it.
All governments therefore have the right to surveil your electronic storage media, paper documents, perform cavity searches, and whatnot.
Except for the US government, who is specifically forbidden by its constitution. And really, just because everyone does it doesn't make it right.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!