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..."'"

Comments

Degradation of rights for nothing

[infalliable]

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.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Lumpy]

Which is why you NEVER take that stuff past the government sanctioned thugs and criminals we have at the airports.

Ship your laptop via UPS or Fedex to your destination, it's a lot cheaper to spend $125.00US to ship it next day air international than to replace it all when you get there because some DHS scumbag takes a shining to your laptop or wants to punish you because you dared question them.

Honest citizens need to act like international spies.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Exanon]

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?

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Lumpy]

It depends, are they planning on making big trouble for moose and squirrel?

Then you ship it inside a dead beaver to a Canadian taxidermist undercover spy in Minnesota. From there he places it inside a stuffed bear that is shipped to the hotel you will be staying, late at night you recover the laptop from the stuffed bear when nobody is looking.

If you need the number of the taxidermist, let me know... 15 inch and smaller laptops please, he cant find beavers large enough to ship 17 inch laptops anymore.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Shakrai]

he cant find beavers large enough to ship 17 inch laptops anymore

Yeah I hate when I can't find a beaver large enough to contain something that's 17 inches in size ;)

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[JavaBear]

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.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Shakrai]

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.....

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Dog-Cow]

If you travel to and from the US, you are far, far more likely to be harmed in some way by the US Government.

I am far more afraid of the US Government than any other entity. And I just walked through the Moslem quarter of the Old City as an Orthodox Jew the other week.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[TheGratefulNet]

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

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[digitig]

Sir, you are welcome to inspect my laptop, but I am afraid there is no information in it.
At all.

"In fact, sir, your laptop plainly shows the maker's name, the model number, a serial number, and the letters A through Z on this bit just below the screen. That is plainly information, and it correlates with intelligence I received from "What PC" magazine that this is a highly desirable model, so I will be confiscating it indefinitely."

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Hatta]

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.

The government on the other hand is right here, we interact with it every day. It's closer, and vastly more powerful than any terrorist. It does pose a real threat, and you should be afraid.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[kalirion]

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.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[fredrated]

"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.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[cliffski]

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.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Shakrai]

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.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[DaveyJJ]

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?

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Lemmy Caution]

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? Whether they do it by force or by subterfuge, "invading" is their goal, and they're already doing it. See also the publicly funded Muslim-based elementary schools in Detroit. Or how about the special exceptions made at an American university for school-funded foot baths for the Muslim facility? I ought to go all Wikipedia and cite my references, but if you've not heard about these things, then you're not paying attention.

There is well-established precedent for allowing religious courts in the UK to act as arbitrators in family matters, by mutual consent of all parties. This is not about Islam taking over, and it is hysterical xenophobia to think it is.

When we hear the word "Sharia," we jump to images of beatings and stonings, but it is, in fact, a very broad term which applies to the framework for jurisprudence derived from Islamic principles. The kind of Sharia which is allowed to arbitrate over certain matters in the UK is as far removed from stonings as a church picnic is from the Spanish Inquisition.

Re:Degradation of rights for nothing

[Jason Levine]

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.

Books? Any written materials?

[thodi]

This is crazy, people. Make sure you're not wearing any clothing with text on it, you might have to enter the USA naked.

Re:Books? Any written materials?

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

They also cover 'all papers and other written documentation,'
How the hell does this not violate the "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." part of the 4th amendment, where is the SCOTUS case that ruled that US citizens upon returning to the US borders do not enjoy the protections of the constitution?

Re:Books? Any written materials?

[CrazedWalrus]

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.

Re:Books? Any written materials?

[Ihlosi]

you're better off just crossing the borders naked.

"That's a nice tattoo you got there, sir, but what does it say ? We better send it over to the NSA for decryption. Now step over here, this will hurt only a little ..."

Re:Books? Any written materials?

[Bartab]

unreasonable searches and seizures

Searches at the border are legally reasonable. This has been held for a very very long time.

Since everybody loves Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

Re:Books? Any written materials?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to be *in* the US for your rights to be in effect.

No, remarkably, the 4th amendment says that the government cannot seize your papers. Is this the government? Check. Are these your papers? Check.

Let me know when you find the part of the amendment that says "except outside of the US".

The worst part

[dreamchaser]

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.

Re:The worst part

[link-error]

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

Re:The worst part

[MoonBuggy]

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".

Re:The worst part

[the4thdimension]

I find long keys to protect funny files are best. For instance, the key:
"Hithisisagoodpasswordforprotectingmyfilezyoubetterkn0wthepassword"

To protect a single text file which reads:
"Waste of time"

Re:The worst part

[tinkerghost]

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".

They won't pay at all. All theft/loss policies have clauses regarding seizure by the government.

Re:The worst part

[Deth_Master]

Bruce Schneier's essay on Security: The value of privacy

Re:The worst part

[fbjon]

No, it's far less than that, actually. This page says 109 bits of entropy, which sounds about right. More variation and larger character space would be better.

Re:The worst part

[PReDiToR]

I just visited the US, went to Vegas for two weeks and in the middle of that had 4 days in San Fran via domestic flight.
Took two brand new Asus EEEPCs, one for me, one for my partner. All they had on them were my SSH keys and a copy of NX so that we could log in to my computer back home and transfer our journals and pictures there rather than risk losing them to this kind of "appropriation".

We went through security at Manchester without a hitch. When we went through Mccarran to go to San Fran we got put in the TSA lane and got the explosives sniffer machine done to us:
TSA: Lift your arms and stand still.
(Air jets attempt to dislodge particles from our hair and clothes, then vacuum them into the sensors)
TSA: Put your boots, belts, hand luggage in here, laptops in this tray.
My laptops went through and the agent doing the security actually said "oh, those small Asus's"
To which I replied, "yeah, very handy for travel, got them specially for the trip over here".
Got them back, didn't even have to turn them on, my USB keys weren't searched, my SD cards likewise. My camera wasn't opened, the memory card wasn't inspected.

I went to America with the expectation of having my goods and chattels molested by TSA, but aside from my GF's surgical implant setting the metal detectors off three times, we sailed through TSA three times.

I'm not saying that TSA shouldn't have these powers, but even when you tell them that you're carrying spent pistol/rifle casings, they don't always give you a hard time. My clothes were covered in GSR, I had spent casings, two laptops, numerous memory cards, cellphones and a big knife (in checked luggage), nothing was out of the ordinary. My checked luggage wasn't even opened, I had a UV reactive cable tie on it, so it would have been cut had they searched the bags with the knife and casings in.

Given these powers exist, and as an alien travelling through the TSA "interested" lane, I can say that they don't always use them. I would imagine that they are like any other police officer: Give them a hard time and they will make your life hard, because they can. Treat them like they are doing a necessary job and help them if at all possible and they will appreciate your "cooperation" and not waste your time and theirs.

YMMV.

Re:The worst part

[PReDiToR]

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.

Re:The worst part

[flitty]

This might be a clue...

Reasonable measures must be taken to protect business information and attorney-client privileged material, the policies say, but there is no specific mention of the handling of personal data such as medical and financial records.

Sounds like I just found my next company to start...
"Proprietary Wal-Mart Information" stickers for sale to put on your laptop! Very Official Looking. Keep your private data safe! Also available, A Tiny "Wal-Mart" branded OS that launches when your key sequence is not entered at startup that confuses TSA agents and lets you keep your laptop! Dummy files contain fake proprietary information. Included is instructions to deal with agents and how to protect your "business information".

I'm heartbroken that policies explicitly cover "business information" without mentioning personal financial information, But i'm not really surprised at this point.

Re:The worst part

[digitig]

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)?

Re:The worst part

[Hoi Polloi]

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.

Re:The worst part

[bjorniac]

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.

Re:The worst part

[SpicyLemon]

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."

Re:The worst part

[Teilo]

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.

Re:The worst part

[Maxo-Texas]

You realize what this means of course.... extremely courteous and polite terrorists.

Re:The worst part

[geobeck]

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

You must be new to Amerika.

Re:The worst part

[petgiraffe]

1. Don't you think your avg. terr'st would have some training, and fein co-operation vs. act like a pissed off asshole?

Maybe.

And don't you think DHS knows this and would then disregard the attitude of the person in question?

Are you kidding? There are very few people left in the world, even among TSA employees themselves, who think TSA is there for any reason other than theatrics. They know they're just there for show and they behave just like any other person who spends 8 hours a day doing a completely meaningless job: They're nice to people who are nice to them and they're dicks to people who aren't.

If you want to have an easy time getting through screening just walk up with a smile on your face. Say, "Hello!" and act as though seeing the TSA agent has been the high-point of your day. If you can perfect this technique you'll not only enjoy less hassle at airports, but better service in restaurants, hotels, bars, retail stores, and well, pretty much everywhere you have to deal with other people.

Re:The worst part

[backslash_forward]

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.

Re:The worst part

[Shakrai]

Even if you're not convicted of anything it still shows up on background checks done by employers as an arrest.

As someone who was once charged with a crime he didn't commit I can tell you from experience that my state (NYS) seals all records of the arrest upon your acquittal or the dropping/dismissal of the charges against you.

In my case it was a felony charge that went to Grand Jury. The Grand Jury refused to indict (thank god for the jury system...) so the DA had to drop the charges. Awhile later I received a court order directing the appropriate law enforcement agencies to seal all records of the arrest and destroy any copies of my fingerprints and/or photograph that they obtained from said arrest. The order also directed any agencies that may have received a copy of said items from the original police agency (i.e: the Feds) to do the same.

As I recall the only exception allowed for in the dismissal order to unseal the arrest record related to the requirement that you disclose any arrests when applying for a NYS pistol permit. It made no exceptions for any agency to retain a copy of the fingerprints/photograph. They had to be destroyed.

Why it doesn't work like this in other states is beyond me. A simple arrest should not show up in a background check without a subsequent conviction or at least an ongoing trial.

Re:The worst part

[memorycardfull]

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

Re:The worst part

[davester666]

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...

Their law versus ours

[fudgefactor7]

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?...

Re:Their law versus ours

[Erie Ed]

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.

Re:Their law versus ours

[Anonymous Coward]

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

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

 

Re:Their law versus ours

[soast]

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.

Sorry for the Godwin Violation

[mlwmohawk]

But...

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have to at least consider that it is a bird of the family anatidae (apologies to Douglas Adams)

This is outrageous! and a 4th amendment violation.

Hitler may have lost WWII, but the forces of fascism and totalitarianism are still fighting the war and are winning.

Re:Sorry for the Godwin Violation

[Shakrai]

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?

Ah, Penny Arcade predicted this.

[WDot]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2007/20070125.jpg

I thought it was funny the first time I read it, it's scary that it may be more true now. )=

DHS IT

[MrKaos]

BOFH from DHS : I have an excellent way to reduce our IT spending...

I can only think of two words

[LoadWB]

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.

Re:I can only think of two words

[Ralph Spoilsport]

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

Re:I can only think of two words

[Jesus_666]

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.

Absolutely reasonable...

[Slashidiot]

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...

My god. I can understand that they think those policies are necessary, but nobody can believe that is reasonable.

"We can take everything you own and keep it as long as we want. Only if we feel like it. We think this is a reasonable exchange, you get to enter the country, we get to steal your stuff"

Kleptocracy, anyone ?

[Ihlosi]

"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.

Toilet paper...

[jrister]

Its nice that government agencies regard the Constitution as toilet paper.

What they fail to realize is that all their power originates with that document, and in a way, it's like a contract between the government and the people. Since the government has decided to violate the terms (breach of contract), then maybe we should stop recognizing their authority, since they have chosen to invalidate that document that is the sole source of that authority?

I'd rather have freedom than "security"

[Shinary]

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.

Distressing quote from the article

[honkycat]

Customs Deputy Commissioner Jayson P. Ahern said the efforts "do not infringe on Americans' privacy." In a statement submitted to Feingold for a June hearing on the issue, he noted that the executive branch has long had "plenary authority to conduct routine searches and seizures at the border without probable cause or a warrant" to prevent drugs and other contraband from entering the country.

Perhaps it's just a poor characterization of his statements, but it appears that Mr. Ahern just doesn't get it. Regardless of what authority the executive branch has had, he needs a pretty damn strong argument as to why these efforts don't infringe on "Americans'" privacy. I can't think of any reasonable argument that they do not. Whether it's a *justified* infringement is a somewhat subtler question, but these powers are certainly subject to abuse. Further, even the obscenely few restrictions on preserving the data after the investigation is completed are little consolation in the face of the many stories of data mishandling by government entities. Mr. Ahern desperately needs to get a clue.

Further, even as an American I take exception to the idea that it's only relevant for our government to protect "Americans'" privacy, as is implied by this quote. Again, it might be due to incomplete quoting, but I somehow doubt that. As a scientist who frequently works with international collaborators, it's really true that communities outside the U.S. are deciding to keep their business out of this country due to the ridiculous policies for entering. It's often just not worth the effort. Way to go, Executive Branch!!

Analog form?

[MMC Monster]

That includes BRAINS!

Any device capable of storing information...

[Valtor]

The policies cover 'any device capable of storing information in digital or analog form

My brain is a device that can record patterns in an analog form. If they want it, they'll have to get it over my dead body ;-)

Industrial Espionage...

[TomRK1089]

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.

Re:Industrial Espionage...

[Ihlosi]

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".

Re:Industrial Espionage...

[AusIV]

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.

Think of the children!

[Anonymous Coward]

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!

A little more context...

[Notquitecajun]

The US government - and just about any government - has always retained the right to inspect anything entering its borders - citizenship notwithstanding. This is NOTHING new. It simply applies to laptops, now. It hasn't been a privacy issue for 200+ years, and NOW we're concerned about it.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just trying to provide a little context. If you're going to complain about it, at least acknowledge a little bit of history here.

As if anyone would move data on a laptop...

[rasmack]

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...

Obtain laptops cheap!

[Jason Levine]

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.)

Back in Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

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?
   

yes, except

[Reality Master 201]

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.

Organized Protests

[Ratbert42]

What we really need is a new Linux distro that's just Rickrolls, goatse and 2 Girls One Cup. "Wait, officer! Don't forget these DVDs here."

Re:Terrorism, Thy Name Is...

[Lumpy]

What happened to needing "probable cause" as a justification for a search?

Dick Cheney stabbed it to death with a letter opener and then as it was trying to draw it's last breath he took a razor to it's throat slicing it deep, then pulled it's tongue through the cut as a message to the other rights and justifications.

Last I heard, Dick was standing in the national archives with a jug of white out screaming, " SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND!"

It's about putting power in... their hands

[YA_Python_dev]

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.

DId the former USSR do this? China? Vietnam?

[jotaeleemeese]

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?

Re:Anonymous Coward.

[Jesus_666]

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.

I don't know why you people are bitching

[elrous0]

It's not like there's some LAW that protects your personal effects against unreasonable searches and seizures or anything. Geez what are you guys, a bunch of terrorist-lovers?

Re:I don't know why you people are bitching

[Russ Nelson]

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

Terrorists:1 Reasonable People:0

[mubes]

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.

Something like this happened to me

[silentcoder]

Though I am in South Africa, not America.
I was dating a girl in Brazil (I married her later) and my company had several major projects in Nigeria. So I had regular flights to both countries (and both are common drug routes around here). Add to this long hair and a liking for heavy-metal t-shirts - I ended up on a watch list (nobody would confirm this but it became pretty obvious).

On my way out to see my girlfriend one time, I was searched on the plane (which they made late to do it) but my luggage was already in the hold and my hand luggage clean so they couldn't really finish the search.
When I came back, I was arrested on site. My bags were searched and I had to explain almost every item. Not the easiest of those was a bottle of home-made spirit-vinegar I bought in a small country town in Brazil as a gift for my mother. Finally, convinced my luggage was clean (now I am already two hours late, my cellphone isn't charged and I cannot even contact my ride who is waiting outside the door for me) they decide I need to be X-rayed in case I swallowed condoms.

So I wait. I finally convince the cop to at least let me talk to the person who is picking me up (my boss) - with him coming along, so three hours later my boss gets to find out why I didn't show (lucky for me - he was still there). We wait for another 2 hours. Meantime I am missing a major business deadline (which would end up costing me a small fortune) but me and my boss are talking shop about the various projects.
Still the police who are supposed to take me to the state hospital for X-rays haven't shown up. Finally the border-cop (who has been hearing us talk all this time) says: "I'm gonna let you go - I'm sure you're clean now but we have to be sure and if I keep you any longer I'm going to start running risk of false arrest complaints."
As he uncuffs me and I walk away I asked him: "So will you take my name OFF your watchlist now ?"
Him: "Who said your name was on a watchlist ?"
Me: "You picked me up at passport control by my name and face. You tried to search me on the way out as well. You kept me here for almost 5 hours while all the random screen cases were gone in 30 minutes, despite the fact that I was the only one who wasn't complaining and shouting at you for the annoyance and understood you are just doing your job. I know my regular flights include two well known drug routes over a three year period... you didn't have to SAY I'm on a watchlist - it's obvious."

He didn't say anything. I dropped it after that, didn't feel like more hassle but I must tell you it was one of the most annoying experiences of my life.

And the worst thing: planes always upset my stomach. I have no idea if this is because of the airline food or the airpressure but it does. Getting of that plane, the first thing I wanted to do was go to the little boys room for a little private meditation. I wasn't allowed to go to the loo (in case I flushed the evidence of swallowed drugs) - and I had to hold it in for five painful hours. I must tell you - many times during that wasted day I was tempted to just let it go, and leave them the mess to clean up.

Sealed Letter-class mail is exempt

[davide marney]

Officers may not read or permit others to read correspondence contained in sealed letter class mail (the international equivalent of First Class) without an appropriate search warrant or consent. Only articles in the postal system are deemed "mail." Letters carried by individuals or private carriers such as DHL, UPS, or Federal Express, for example, are not considered to be mail, even if they are stamped, and thus are subject to a border search as provided in this policy.

IANAL. Does this mean I could seal a flashdrive in a letter-class envelope, put a US Mail stamp on it, and they would need a court order to unseal it?

In any case, it's an interesting clause in the regulations. Why is sealed mail treated with a higher standard of privacy than other forms of communication? Historical reasons only?

I'm becoming embarrassed to wear my uniform...

[IDtheTarget]

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????

Re:Good luck...

[Quattro Vezina]

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. Anyone trying to break it would just see a prompt asking for a passphrase; they'd never expect to have to do something like 'cat /usr/bin/mplayer | decrypt somefile'. No, they'd just run 'decrypt somefile' and try to type something in when prompted 'Enter your passphrase: '. And good luck brute-forcing it; you it'll take forever to brute-force a passphrase that size (/usr/bin/mplayer on my system is 8195KB...good luck brute-forcing that).

No Rights Until On US Soil

[geomon]

What most US citizens don't realize is that your 4th Amendment Rights - all of your Constitutional Rights - don't kick in until you are actually on US soil. That means you have to get through Customs first. So, legally, until you are released from Customs, you are not covered by the Constitutional protections many of you claim the DHS is violating.

I know this is an Alice in Wonderland-esque parsing of the rules, but it is a fact. You are not *in* the US until Customs lets you pass. The alternative is to go back into the country where you are coming from (let's say, Canada), head to a US embassy (which is US soil), and then file a complaint about your treatment at the border. It isn't likely to get much traction, but at least once you are on the embassy compound grounds, you are a US citizen again with full Constitutional rights.

Haven't you ever wondered how the Customs people are able to tear apart cars looking for drugs and illegal aliens without a court order?

Re:Good luck...

[SiChemist]

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

Re:Good luck...

[1u3hr]

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.

Re:Good luck...

[jeebusroxors]

I'm not sure about you, but /I/ store my USB stick with my encryption keys down south when traveling, if you catch my drift.
It sure is a pain in the ass to recover it though.

Re:Good luck...

[Westech]

Imagine if the passphrase to your key was the contents of a large binary on your system.

Even better, set your passphrase to:

"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."

That way even if they do crack it they'll probably die of shame as they're typing it in.

Re:Good luck...

[kybred]

Why not just use your wife's name + her birthday?

That's no good, I need something that I can remember.