Slashdot Mirror


DHS Allowed To Take Laptops Indefinitely

andy1307 writes with a Washington Post story giving details of Department of Homeland Security policies for border searches of laptops and other electronic devices (as well as papers). (We have been discussing border searches for a while now.) DHS says such procedures have long been in place but were "disclosed last month because of public interest in the matter," according to the article. Here is a link to the policy (PDF, 5 pages). "Federal agents may take a traveler's laptop or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, as part of border search policies the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed. Also, officials may share copies of the laptop's contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption, or other reasons, according to the policies, dated July 16 and issued by two DHS agencies, US Customs and Border Protection and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement... DHS officials said that the newly disclosed policies — which apply to anyone entering the country, including US citizens — are reasonable and necessary to prevent terrorism... The policies cover 'any device capable of storing information in digital or analog form,' including hard drives, flash drives, cell phones, iPods, pagers, beepers, and video and audio tapes. They also cover 'all papers and other written documentation,' including books, pamphlets and 'written materials commonly referred to as "pocket trash..."'"

51 of 1,123 comments (clear)

  1. Degradation of rights for nothing by infalliable · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Worst part is despite the searches and seizures, they accomplish very little. You inconvenience and step all over the rights of average, law-abiding citizens to give the impression of safety.

    1. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by Exanon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A few other problems: I was going to go to this years DEFCON but because of the laptop checks and the registration requirement (notifying the government 3 weeks before coming to the country) I have canceled the trip. (No, I really don't have anything I am secretive about on my laptop).

      My story can be seen as a pitiful example. But I heard rumors from former colleagues at a company I used to work for that they have changed their security measures on corporate laptops when traveling to the US.
      It includes taking the laptop down to the IT department and having them make an image of the HDD, then it is replaced by a new one, the image is downloaded when on US soil. Probably through VPN or similar.

      The question that raises is the same that was raised in Sweden over the FRA-legislation: The possiblity of industrial espionage. So when both private and corporate trips might be canceled or postponed, doesn't that hurt the US economy?

    2. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by JavaBear · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Somehow this doesn't make me feel any safer, quite the opposite actually.

      I don't know who I fear the most, Al-Queda, or the US government, It's pretty much a toss-up at the moment, and I'm not so sure that the needle won't end on the latter.

    3. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know who I fear the most, Al-Queda, or the US government

      That's easy. Al-Queda can't take away your freedom. All they can take away is your life. The US Government can do both.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      when you can't give REAL safety, you give a fake form of it.

      we have been calling this 'security theater'.

      the government FULLY KNOWS THIS. their immoral fuckwads but they aren't idiots.

      everyone up and down the food chain with anything over 100 as an iq knows that its 'all for show'. ALL OF IT.

      empty gestures impress little old ladies. little old ladies vote. the system self-continues.

      QED

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    5. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by kalirion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's easy. Al-Queda can't take away your freedom.

      Tell that to those they've kidnapped.

      But I agree, the chances of terrorism negatively impacting your life are infinitesimal compared to the chances of the government doing the same.

    6. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by fredrated · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "the UK, where a judge has upheld the notion that a Muslim family dispute ought to be covered by Sharia"

      You say it right there in your post, it was the UK judge that granted this, it was not taken by force by the Muslims. This is exactly what the poster is saying, al Qaida did not seize this, it was given up by us.

    7. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by cliffski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No it accomplishes a lot. It decimates USAs international tourism. Nobody I know has flown to holiday in the USA since 9/11. Your security bullshit makes the trip unenjoyable.
      Meanwhile Canadian hotel companies are doing well.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    8. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you not heard about the UK, where a judge has upheld the notion that a Muslim family dispute ought to be covered by Sharia, in addition to the normal UK legal system?

      How is that any different from the Jewish Beth din courts that have operated in New York City (and other parts of the US?) for decades and done much the same thing? I really don't see a problem with this as long as these "courts" don't have the rule of law and as long as nobody can be compelled against their will to resolve a dispute in them.

      Whether they do it by force or by subterfuge, "invading" is their goal, and they're already doing it

      You sound like someone warning of the yellow peril in the early 20th century. Somehow I doubt that most Muslims have the goal of "invading" the Western World. Europe has their own problems with Muslim immigration that they will need to contend with but I seriously question the notion that it's anything more sinister than people looking for work.

      See also the publicly funded Muslim-based elementary schools in Detroit

      Citation? I don't have an issue with Muslim-based schools (how many Catholic-based schools exist in this country?) but I would take issue with public funds going to them.

      Or how about the special exceptions made at an American university for school-funded foot baths for the Muslim facility?

      How is that any different from an employer that gives Jewish employees a day off for Yum Kippur or arranges for alternative meals for Hindu staff when the cafeteria is serving beef?

      I'm sorry but I just don't buy this alarmist argument. We've heard the exact same things said about every single culture that has ever immigrated into this country -- even "white" ones like the Irish or Polish. Somehow none of them have ever managed to subvert the United States. I'm not real worried about the Muslims doing so either. To listen to your post one would think that there is some sort of master plan that all Muslims are aware of to sneak into the West and subvert us from the inside out.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by DaveyJJ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't you find it a tad hypocritical to be chastising a judge for allowing Islamic tenets to be used to settle disputes, and yet your sig quotes another mythology/religious text which is just as silly? I do. If you claim Islam and/or all of the other 4,200 recognized religions in the world is not a valid process of thinking, please make sure to add yours to the pile to. But then again ... Rational arguments don't tend to have an impact on religious people. If they did, there wouldn't be any religious people, would there?

      --
      DaveyJJ
    10. Re:Degradation of rights for nothing by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's really very little reason to fear Al-Qaeda at all. You're more likely to die crossing the street, or taking a shower. Maybe that burger you ate last night will be the one to push your cholesterol over the edge. To any rational person, terrorism in the US is simply not on the radar.

      I highly agree. Al-Qaeda has killed about 3,000 people on US soil in the past 10 years. That's an average of 300 people a year. Doing some Google research, I found that 300 people a year nationwide die of flight-related blood clots. ( http://www.aviation-health.com/news/browse.php?action=shownews&category=&id=23&topicid=258 ) So you have an equal chance of being killed by a terrorist or by sitting too much on a plane. Yet we don't see a "War on Airplane Blood Clots" complete with mandatory cholesterol screening at airports and confiscation of cheeseburgers by airport security.

      Car accidents kill over 42,800 people a year. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_accident#Trends_in_collision_statistics ) That's more than one 9-11 per month every year. Do we have a "War on Car Accidents" complete with mandatory breathalyzer testing required every time anyone starts their car and the ability to confiscate a person's car if an officer thinks that the person is being even the slightest bit reckless? Of course not!

      Right after 9-11 happened, we had a good reason to be fearful of terrorists above anything else. We were attacked and didn't know the whole story. We didn't know if there would be more attacks and if so who would be next. The only reason people are fearful of terrorists today is because the government has found it to be a useful tool to expand their powers. If the government wants to do something that it knows people will object to, it just cries "Terrorism!" (or "Child Porn!") and it finds the path to additional power smoothed out. Sure, there are still people who oppose them, but it's a lot easier to attack them ("Why do you love the terrorists/child pornographers?") and distract everyone from the real issue of ever expanding government powers and ever shrinking citizen's rights.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  2. The worst part by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is even worse is that if you try to use encryption to maintain a level of privacy and security, that will just mean they'll keep it longer while they try to crack it.

    1. Re:The worst part by link-error · · Score: 5, Insightful

          Strong encryption with internet storage is the only way to go now I'm afraid.

      --
      -Unresolved symbol? Byte me!
    2. Re:The worst part by MoonBuggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The privacy violations are ridiculous, but at least we know about them and can take steps to avoid them - businesses providing 'clean' laptops and accessing data remotely over an encrypted connection, for instance. I don't for a second condone them looking through our data, but the fact is it's happening and that means we have to do our best to negate the effects.

      The fact that they can basically steal your laptop, phone and any other nice electronics you happen to carry, on the other hand, could potentially be rather costly. I'm not even sure how likely an insurance company is to pay out for a claim of "it was confiscated and held indefinitely by the US government".

    3. Re:The worst part by PReDiToR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I like your tone, does that get you a long way in life?
      Come over here sir, we just need to check your bags.

      No, I was relating my own experiences with the TSA as a /. reader who was fully aware of how shitty the experience could be.
      I'm saying that being helpful and smiling and not criticising the process *while you're in it* can get you through it a lot faster, and with less pain. Your tone would suggest that you're one of these people that have a permanent look of disdain on their face over the whole thing, rather than a "How can I help, officer?" look that will have them happy to wave you through because you're not making their lives hard.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    4. Re:The worst part by digitig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who decides what is "reasonable"? The equipment is returned when the investigation is "complete", but I saw nothing in the article saying how long they could take over that investigation. And if you try to sue for return of your property, what could you offer as evidence that the time they are taking is unreasonable, if they claim that more time is still needed (particularly as there's no requirement even of suspicion)?

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    5. Re:The worst part by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You shouldn't even have to resort to countermeasures in the first place. It is like saying "I guess I'll wear a face fask to protect myself from being sucker punched by the TSA." You're accepting an unacceptable situtation. The only acceptable response to this policy (aka abuse) is to ban it legally and remove its supporters from the government. Unreasonable search and seizure shouldn't even be allowed now anyway.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    6. Re:The worst part by bjorniac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No one is found innocent. They are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The only findings are guilty and not guilty. Sure, it may sound like semantics but it's pretty important as a distinction - you don't have to prove your innocence.

    7. Re:The worst part by SpicyLemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Amendment IV -
      "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

      We all know, though, that the government has a very strange way of interpreting the constitution sometimes. They'll use some argument along the lines of, "Well, since we're not getting a warrent, the 4th amendment doesn't apply."

      --
      This post approved by Shampoo.
    8. Re:The worst part by Teilo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that that sucks, but, dude, that keyboard does look like a bomb. I mean, home-made - stretchy looking material with embedded electrical contacts - battery - circuit board - no case or shell. I have a feeling you would have had the same problem before there was a TSA.

      --
      Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
    9. Re:The worst part by geobeck · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...you don't have to prove your innocence.

      You must be new to Amerika.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    10. Re:The worst part by backslash_forward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If your goal is to generate a lawsuit, like Mr. Hellar, then go ahead and be an ass - just be aware that you're going to suffer pain for your goal.

      And that is how they win -- if they haven't already. What is it, specifically, about standing up for ones rights that makes him/her an ass? Perception is a very powerful tool. If people perceive tyranny the norm then it makes the tyrants jobs a whole lot easier.

    11. Re:The worst part by memorycardfull · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dear Sir, Those who politely sacrifice liberty for security especially deserve neither. Cheers!

    12. Re:The worst part by davester666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't forget, you could have written things in invisible ink on your clothes, so they'll have to also keep all of them as well.

      So, you get to come out of customs with absolutely nothing [as there COULD be some writing on anything]. And you'll have to be exposed to massive doses of x-rays just to check if you've swallowed anything.

      And yet, all the "terrorists" have to do is go to a BestBuy and purchase a new laptop, or even just go to a public Internet terminal and download whatever information they need via any number of protocols, with no problem at all, in a manner that should be virtually untraceable as to who sent or received the information.

      So, more inconvenience with zero benefit [at least, no benefits for the stated purpose, which is to hinder terrorism somehow].

      Now, this is an ideal program for economic espionage by the US government, as they basically state that all your information will be put up on a server and made available to pretty much any gov't agency to access if they want. And it will be less likely that all businessmen will take the time to protect their information that all but the most stupid terrorists would...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  3. Their law versus ours by fudgefactor7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because their little law says they can do it doesn't mean it doesn't run afoul of the Contitutional protections. Were this to be challenged, it would be killed pretty quickly: one cannot instigate such as this in the name of "terrorism" and not expect at least one challenge on "unreasonable search and seizure." You cannot fight global terrorism by turning the USA into a police-state. All that accomplishes is angering the populace....and you remember the last time Americans became angry with their government?...

    1. Re:Their law versus ours by Erie+Ed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I bet over 2/3 of americans either a. don't know that this is going on or b. don't care. Even if people actually gave a damn we tend to not take any action.

    2. Re:Their law versus ours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      and you remember the last time Americans became angry with their government?...

      They were beaten with clubs, battons and shot with riot rounds?

       

    3. Re:Their law versus ours by soast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is the government has brainwashed the people. They want you to fear them by intimidating you with time in prison or financially. Most people think in the way 'if i goto prison i will lose my job and cant get another because i have a blemish on my record' that reason alone will stop 99% of the people for standing up to it. The other reason is who has the resources to fight it, rich people do but rich people have no worries.

  4. I can only think of two words by LoadWB · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Normally I would put together a verbose, and perhaps even eloquent, response to such information. But I can only think of two words.

    Bull shit.

    We are losing, people. We are losing our rights and there will be more to come. That our own personal property can be seized "to fight terrorism" on the terms presented is absolute, unadulterated, pure and uncut bull shit.

    1. Re:I can only think of two words by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Well, you're being nice. The two words that popped into my mind were:

      FASCIST PIGFUCKERS.

      Run while you can. If you think Obama's gonna make it all better, you're nuts. The whole imperial mess is rolling into a death spiral. Run while you can.

      RS

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    2. Re:I can only think of two words by Jesus_666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Run while you can.

      In other words: Vote with your feet. While Europe and Canada certainly aren't free form this kind of bullshit, the USA proudly take the lead (and a pretty big one at that). If the conditions inside the USA are becoming unbearable, emigrate to a more friendly country. If enough of you do it you might form a noticable minority in your new country and get enough media attention to discourage local politicians from playing the control state card as well.

      If you consider leaving, now is a good time. Yes, the rest of the world is expensive because the Dollar is on its way to becoming toy money. That makes your leave an especially strong statement: "I'll start with much less money in my new country but I don't care as long as I get out of here."

      Just about the only thing that'd make most of the people consider something being amiss would be an emigration wave of people who are vocal about why they leave and who'd gladly choose a lower standard of living (if only temporary) over being subject to DHS and the like.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  5. Kleptocracy, anyone ? by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Yeah, you'll get your stuff back in, uh, fourty years. Sorry, rules are rules. And only if it doesn't get lost or misplaced until then."

    And when are they going to start confiscating pacemakers and hearing aids ? Last I've heard, these things can also store information in digital form.

  6. Re:Books? Any written materials? by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You have to be *in* the US for your rights to be in effect. Once you're at border security, you're not in the US anymore, so your rights don't apply. At least that's the argument, however dubious.

  7. I'd rather have freedom than "security" by Shinary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, as an American I can say that I would gladly give up my "right" to security for this crap to just go away. Let the people protect themselves from the invisible enemy and force the government to focus on problems that really matter. Like the country's growing illiteracy rate, or the growing rate of obesity, or hey... how about the economy going to shit. Oh I forgot, we need those fat and stupid people working for the DHS at airports and other "high security" areas. They need jobs too. Homeland Security was just another huge mistake by the Bush administration that I hope will be corrected at some point in the near future. I love my country and all, but if the United States keeps following down this road, I am gone.

  8. Industrial Espionage... by TomRK1089 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What if your laptop contains trade secrets or the like? Wouldn't that constitute industrial espionage to decrypt said information? What if a DHS employee has a relative who competes in that field? I can only imagine the potential messes there.

    1. Re:Industrial Espionage... by Ihlosi · · Score: 5, Insightful
      What if your laptop contains trade secrets or the like?

      Too bad.

      Wouldn't that constitute industrial espionage to decrypt said information?

      It's only illegal if you're not the government.

      What if a DHS employee has a relative who competes in that field?

      Good for him !

      I can only imagine the potential messes there.

      You misspelled "opportunities".

    2. Re:Industrial Espionage... by AusIV · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I've wondered about doctors and lawyers, who have federal laws that prohibit them from disclosing data about their clients. It appears that as soon as they try to cross the border with a laptop containing this information, the government only gives them the option of which law to break.

      When the government puts people in a position where there is no way to avoid breaking the law, we have a serious problem.

  9. Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff wrote in an opinion piece published last month in USA Today that "Searches have uncovered violent jihadist materials as well as images of child pornography."
    Ah, the magic words!

    I reckon you could even implement gun control in the US, if you reported that peados were using guns!

  10. As if anyone would move data on a laptop... by rasmack · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I cannot think of a single example where I would want to move sensitive data on a laptop. I may live in a sheltered world but in that world we live in the era of the Internet. If for some reason I wanted to transfer sensitive data across any border, I would think ssh would provide superior security.

    Actually I can in a few minutes push quite a lot of encrypted data to four different countries. If I were physically where I wanted the data it would be even easier.

    I guess this is just another example of reductions in privacy that solve no problems what so ever...

  11. Obtain laptops cheap! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds like a good way for DHS officials to get laptops, iPods, etc real cheap.

    Step 1: Find someone with a laptop, iPod, etc that you'd like to have.
    Step 2: Take it in the name of National Security.
    Step 3: Item "gets lost" and you have a new gadget.

    This is especially useful during the holidays. DHS officials can shop on the job. "Hey Frank, didn't you say your kid wanted one of those new iPods? Well look at this guy walking up now."

    I wonder what, if any, protections are in place to keep this from being abused. (Any more than giving someone the power to confiscate any item of yours for little to no reason and keep it indefinitely is an abuse of power from the start.)

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  12. Back in Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Back in Europe when strikingly similar measures were in place we used to call the implementers ``fucking Nazis``, then ``fucking Communists`` and we would often risk our life to escape and be able to live at the land of freedom, in the USA.
    Then we thought the Nazis were gone and then the Communists lost too... But have they?
       

  13. yes, except by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fact that this kind of rule may be unconstitutional means exactly nothing unless you can convince the judicial branch to rule it so, the executive branch to respect that ruling, and the legislative branch to bitchslap the executive if/when it refuses to behave.

    There's at least two items in the list that I won't be holding my breath for.

  14. It's about putting power in... their hands by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Worst part is despite the searches and seizures, they accomplish very little. You inconvenience and step all over the rights of average, law-abiding citizens to give the impression of safety.

    It's not for nothing. They are not stupid, there's a very good reason for this: power. Information is power, and if they know about your data (it doesn't matter if it's something legal or not), they have power over you.

    --
    There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  15. Re:Sorry for the Godwin Violation by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The constitution doesn't apply until you get past the customs officer. And even then only to US citizens.

    Do you have a citation for the Constitution not applying to non-Americans on American soil or are you just talking out of your ass?

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  16. DId the former USSR do this? China? Vietnam? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Vietnam didn't. I travelled there several times with my laptop and never had any issues.

    Can somebody give me a good reason why I should not continue my personal boycott against travel to the US?

    I would have to leave all my gadgetry behind at home. Absolutely appalling. It is not the fact that a seizure can happen, but that nonchalantly the authorities have the power to keep your stuff for as long as they please. Nice way to nick an iPod.

    I used to go to old U.S. of A. once a year, spending a reasonable amount of money each time (hotel, plain tickets, etc.) and a few times I took stop overs in the US in my way home when visiting my family, for which uncle Sam surely derived some money as well.

    I know nobody cares, but more and more people are *actively* avoiding the US when travelling.

    I went to Canada instead earlier this year, and the difference could have not been starker: I was granted a visa on arrival (I am Mexican, no bloody way that would ever happen in the US, even if I was coming from Europe, as I normally do), the people are friendly and although are losing soldiers to the Taliban more than what would be reasonable to expect, they are not idiotically paranoid.

    USians: when are you going to recover the essence of the goodness that your country promised when it was founded?

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  17. Re:Anonymous Coward. by Jesus_666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yup. The terrorists have already won. It's not yet clear to which extent, but they certainly did have their way with the USA. The economy is badly damaged and will not recover as fast as before as people are becoming wary of doing business with American companies, especially when that involves sending reps over. Tourism has probably taken a hit as well; I certainly don't want to be treated like a criminal when vacationing. Much of the rest of the world agrees that the USA have become a bunch of paranoid dickheads and America's own intellectual elite is wondering whether the government is still legitimate.

    Let's face it, three and a half airplanes were enough to kick the USA from "#1 Superpower and Most Important Country in the World" to "uncomfortably well-armed paranoid hegemony in decline". The terrorists have won and it's unsettling to see how much indirect damage they've done so far.

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  18. Terrorists:1 Reasonable People:0 by mubes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find all of this very frustrating. Not because I have anything in particular to protect (indeed, I can think of very little that is that important that I would object to a reasonable law enforcement official taking a look at it), but because of whats happened to us in just under seven years.

    The agenda of the terrorist is -not- particularly to kill people, it's to get their agenda into the front of your mind and to encourage you to bend to their point of view in order to stop the pain. Now, it so happens that killing people does that quite well, but just how many times in the past seven years were -you- affected directly by a terrorist, and how many times were you affected by the window-shopping measures put in place to "protect us from terrorism"? Every time we lose another liberty, the terrorists get another point....not to mention the number of very dubious practices that we accept now in our day to day lives because they allegedly make us safer.

    I'm tired of this. Security and protection of the populace is done in back rooms with a low profile, not by folks with machine guns stomping around in airports for PR purposes while punters shuffle, barefoot and half naked, through some electronic gizmo that is then monitored by a human being with a statistically proven error rate in the order of 5% while wondering if they're going to be allowed to keep their own property when they get to the other end.

    I feel a dammed sight safer flying through a European aiport than any US one, that's for sure although europeans are starting to succumb to the 'visible security' mantra now....I saw a great case of this yesterday - one lane in three through security at the airport had an electronic explosives sniffer, the other two had conventional scanners....trouble is, you get to chose which queue you join!!!

    We seem to have lost the understanding that you don't have to knacker peoples rights to have a good level of protection. We need to stop helping people with abhorrent agendas keeping them in the front of our minds, and the best way to do that is to stop eroding hard earned freedoms in the name of terrorism protection.

  19. Re:I don't know why you people are bitching by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From their perspective, all searches are reasonable. WE'RE AT WAR AGAINST A TACTIC, you know.

    --
    Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  20. I'm becoming embarrassed to wear my uniform... by IDtheTarget · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been in the military for 21 years now, partly because I love our Constitution and believe that somebody has to be willing to sacrifice for its defense. I've also been a Republican for my adult voting life. However, it's events like this that make me question both situations. The Right will let me keep my firearms, but will steal my computer. The Left will let me keep my computer, but will steal my firearms. What is a reasonable person to do these days????

  21. Re:Good luck... by SiChemist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You'd better not update mplayer, then! :-)

  22. Re:Good luck... by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Y'know, this might be an interesting idea... Imagine if the passphrase to your key was the contents of a large binary on your system.

    Well, now you've published that idea, it would take them a couple of minutes at most to check all the binaries on any machine. Why not just use your wife's name + her birthday? They'd NEVER think of that.