Slashdot Mirror
FISA and Border Searches of Laptops
With the recent attention to the DHS's draconian policy on laptop searches at borders, a blog post by Steven Bellovin from last month is worth wider discussion. Bellovin extrapolates from the DHS border policy on physical electronic devices and asks why authorities wouldn't push to extend it to electronic data transfers. "...it would seem to make little difference if the information is 'imported' into the US via a physical laptop or via a VPN, or for that matter by a Web connection. The right to search a laptop for information, then, is equivalent to the right to tap any and all international connections, without a warrant or probable cause. (More precisely, one always has a constitutional protection against 'unreasonable' search and seizure; the issue is what the definition of 'unreasonable' is.)"
I have a teletype connected to a tin can that crosses the border with a long peice of twine, connected to another tin can connected to a modem.
About 5 months of this nonsense left at the time of this post, and all these wacky rules can be repealed after that, thank goodness:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushclock.htm
stuff |
"one always has a constitutional protection against 'unreasonable' search and seizure"
I doubt that if you're not an American citizen.
With the reputation down the drain, why pay spies when you can just confiscate laptops?
What Would Jesus Think Was Unreasonable?
Much as I agree that there will probably be a change in course, rights, once take away, are very slow to return. I can foresee that a new president keen to lose his 'inexperienced' image would be reluctant to take that strong a stand against the powers that be at Langley, etc.
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
My interpretation of TFA (and not necessarily the policy/practice) is that the Government reserves the right to decide which information can cross the border into the US, whether by electronic or physical means. Presumably, this would include subversive and seditious materials, i.e., those that strongly challenged the administration.
I am not a crackpot.
The government agrees that they should have the right to investigate each and every connection that goes in or out of the United States, no warrant required. It's impractical to actually watch every connection in real time, or to store them all, but they certainly believe they should have the option to investigate whichever connections they choose at a whim.
Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
Just stay calm, don't be nervous, don't look at their faces, and don't say anything..
No offense, but the ridiculous visa situation, warrant less searches and other issues certainly will secure the US borders.
After all, any country is safer if nobody wants to go and visit it anymore.
"I want everyone to remember why they need us" - liberties and freedoms that are eroded in the name of security and protection never seem to return once the threat is lifted again, and each one is another step on the path to Totalitarianism.
Since the Supreme Court has said that the Constitutional limits on Copyright, "for a limited time", that "limited" means whatever Congress says it means, then it follows that "unreasonable" means whatever Congress says it means, too.
The cops opened my unlocked garage and "had a look around", I guess that's reasonable. They searched my car because it was parked outside a dope house (I had no idea; my passengers were collecting money owed them by a slumlord they were cleaning houses for) as well as my person. I guess that's not unreasonable, either.
Why is it they had to amend the Constitution to outlaw alcohol, but not other drugs?
The Supreme court, in effect, says that the Constitutuon is meaningless. We, the people, no longer have any rights. And you can bet your wife's ass that they're already reading your mail and seeing who you connect to on the internet. The people running things today don't believe in the rule of law.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Encryption is especially going to work when the data is only crossing electronically. They can keep it as long as they want, and it won't do them any harm.
Remember folks, if there is just one person (you) or two person's who share an alternative safe means of correspondence, then TrueCrypt works well. Otherwise, GNU Privacy Guard or similar systems work just as well (assuming that everyone involved knows how to use them).
I wank in the shower.
is equivalent to the right to tap any and all international connections
Yes, it is. And you can assume that all international traffic is, in fact, tapped by the US and other nations, including data, voice, SMS, Skype, other VoIP, and FAX.
I think the real question is what kind of legal cases this information can be used in (so far, it appears, none), and which cryptographic protocols have been compromised.
I am pretty sure that no one is searching a small flash drive, which could easily have strong encryption. Thus, one could overnight those drives to his/her destination being relatively certain that only a few organizations (NSA really) could open the files, presuming that they get a physical copy.
This would be more expensive, but if it is important enough (covered by an NDA, personally embarrassing, etc) I would think the cost well warranted.
It seems you can sell anything to the masses in the USA in the name of security: gross violations of the Sacred Constitutional Rights to protect you from terrorists, guns to protect you from thugs and rapists, huge gas-guzzling trucks to protect you from other reckless drivers. Gated communities to keep the looting masses out.
Are Americans really feeling so insecure all the time? Is it really such a dangerous society? Is it due to the awful media that likes to blow up each incident of danger without any sense of risks and proportions? Or are Americans really a big bunch of cowards? (Oh right, I forgot, all the security measures are really more for your protecting your precious family, spouses, offspring, elderly grannies and other loved ones than yourselves...)
Here's my prediction, on record: this policy will be a real boon for micro laptop companies like Asus. Who is going to want to travel with an expensive laptop that can get snatched up by an avaristic or paranoid border cop? It bothers me to no end that they don't need due processes for this because I have a new MacBook Pro. The thing is worth $2,000 and is precisely the sort of thing that would become a target of something like this where the cops turned seized cars into a private car rental service for their own pleasure.
So I guess what'll happen is that people will take an Eee PC with them, and then download the data as needed from some offsite backup service. That, and the whole problem of people avoiding business travel to the United States.
People seem so upset about how this kind of stuff can go on? Well, how can billions of people in China live under authoritarian rule? Now we know...
Right now it only bothers us enough to make 'postings' on a BLOG. When we begin to take real action on behalf of our beliefs -- then they mean something!
In our (as a country) fear of Terrorism and our fear for the safety of our children, we are slowly strangling ourselves of our vitality. Soon, we as a country will be like scared little children hiding under our beds from a thunderstorm. And in the meantime, the rest of the World will eventually pass us by.
so.... please let me know either at admin@scareports.com or at the website ( oblig. link : here ) . You can post anonymously as well if you want....
There's a few interesting ones, a few boring ones but I NEED MORE !!!
What will they make to my little pigeon?
Whoever thought of putting such policy in place must be a moron. If I have anything worth hiding while getting into US, you can bet I am not going to carry it on disk but encrypt it, put it on a server and copy it securely via ssh once I am in.
And if the point is just to give a false sense of security, just cornering random people and having random checks (turn on the laptop sir and enter the password) works as well without needing to keep the laptop indefinitely. Retards.
I recently traveled to US and reformatted my HD making a backup back home just to avoid this stupidity. No one stopped me for any extra checks on the way in though.
The policy is over the line with the indefinite seizures; however, HISTORICALLY the government has always had the right to search anything entering its borders. I've got NO problem with that, particularly for non-US citizens. The indefinite crap has got to go, though - they need to be able to search laptop info a little better than that.
Whilst I liked visiting the USA, its increasing stance against visitors is becoming too invasive to care anymore.
The first time I was forced to electronically store my fingerprints on your systems for an unknown period of time was the start of the end.
How wrong we were to assume that bio passports were enough to subdue to spooks.
Have a 'nice' day!
From here : At a Senate hearing in June, Larry Cunningham, a New York prosecutor who is now a law professor, defended laptop searches--but not necessarily seizures--as perfectly permissible. Preventing customs agents from searching laptops "would open a vulnerability in our border by providing criminals and terrorists with a means to smuggle child pornography or other dangerous and illegal computer files into the country," Cunningham said.
What I want to know is who exactly "smuggles" child pornography around on a laptop. They may have it on their laptop, but they're not "smuggling" it into the country. They more than likely downloaded it from someplace that's already accessible to anyone in the country anyway.
You may be able to prosecute them for it, but it's not going to save any children. Anyone that wants it will just hide it better, and you'll end up arresting people that have a suspect image or three in their browser cache that they've probably never even seen. This is just more bullshit fear-mongering to further strip us of our liberties.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
the next administration (assuming Obama wins) will probably be more interested in taking away our "treasure".
It's Bush that has taken away our "treasure", by spending upwards of $500bn on a useless war. We will be paying for that for decades to come.
If you look over the last 50 years, it's clear: Republicans are bad for the economy and are fiscally irresponsible.
If you want fiscally responsible policies, vote Democrat.
Sec 2(a)(1) sums it up nicely:
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no search of the digital contents of the device or media may be based on the power of the United States to search a person and that person's possessions upon entry into the United States, unless that search is based on a reasonable suspicion regarding that person.
I forget where I read it, but I recently a news article that mentioned the "Streetlight Effect".
We all know the classic joke. A man is walking down the street when he sees a drunk, on his knees, looking for something under a streetlight. The man stops and asks, "What are you looking for?" and the drunk replies. "My keys." So the man gets down on his knees to help him find his keys.
After a half-hour of fruitless searching the man asks, "Well, where did you lose them?" and the drunk replies, "Over in that alley, but the light's better over here."
This sort of security theater reminds me of that joke.
We can't find Bin Laden. We can't stop al Qaeda. We can't (won't) secure our borders with Mexico. But we damn well make air travel a living hell for millions of innocent air travelers because, well, the light's better over here.
as already discussed, Sweden is way ahead of you
Anything more than scanning the laptop via the x-ray conveyer belt is unreasonable.
infowar Let's Firewalls Ermes Defcon hope Leuken-Baden Saudi Arabia $400 million in gold bullion they're 9/11 COSCO BCCI SSL underground watching Agfa JPL Clinton sweep KGB Steve Case the USCOI CIA LABLINK diwnright keyhole Al Jazeera connections espionage USDOJ UNSCOM and SRI lynch Rule not Psix BCCI event security USDOJ false SCUD missile cybercash positives! UOP Albright However, Bellcore BLU-114/B Ft. Bragg it Leuken-Baden follows SDI Aladdin that eternity server covertddd^&*dd3video9(33#&*d[NO CARRIER
Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
Searching a laptop or any physical device is visible and noticeable, hence the needed legal background for public/political acceptance.
My opinion is that most of non physical material (namely computer data) is indeed intercepted and, when relevant, analysed.
Do you remember NSA's Echelon and the like? It was a few years ago... and I don't see any reason it is not used any more, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A.
Just another (tapped) communication from Europe... Cheers.
i'd suggest not even being suspected of wrong doing to be unreasonable. how does this fly with the USA's bill of rights?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Monitor data imported into the US via VPN or web connection I mean
http://www.eff.org/press/releases/2007/08#005398
I say someone catalogs around 200 junky old laptops wipes them out completely(throw Linux on them) then crosses the border with all of them in their car. So border patrol has to take all of them and since they are all cataloged if you don't get all of them back charge them for theft.
iPhones, blackberries are all
Umm, has he been in a cave for the past few years? Seearching electronic data transfers came first.
Guess what, the NSA has been exercising "the right to tap any and all international connections" for decades. As long as one end of the connection is outside the US they can listen in.
Best Slashdot Co
THERE'S NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY ON THE INTERNET. IT'S JUST HOW IT WORKS. Your traffic badmouthing comcast might just be passed through a comcast router, or whatever have you. That's just how it works - you have very little control over your route on the internet. So until you come up with your own ISP, you're screwed.
The NSA has had "the right to tap any and all international connections, without a warrant or probable cause" for decades.
Best Slashdot Co
Intercepting electronic communications would be the moral equivalent of copying your laptop's drive if the copy could be made without depriving you of the use of your laptop and/or delaying your crossing your borders. To date you can't copy a typical laptop's hard drive in the time it takes to move through the X-ray machine. At least, not cheaply.
If they take your laptop and as result you are without it for 15 minutes, or worse, so long that you miss your connecting flight, that's real damage over and above the privacy issues.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
How many low-rent laptops could be crammed with utterly useless information and sent back and forth, back and forth across the US border? Like any basically stupid, attack-trained creature these border-control idiots occasionally have to learn the lesson that when you piss off the boss too often, there are going to be consequences.
Thousands of man-hours wasted on trivia and the inevitable reaming they'll will eventually get from their elected masters, hopefully the loss of some upper-level jobs...now there's some consequences.
Being held accountable is the only thing these fascist half-wits really worry about.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
My definition of unreasonable search and seizure is "some asshole who decides to take my laptop and confiscate it just because they can."
Maybe now is the time to start pushing for secure bootable file systems.
I'm not talking about wrapping for instance ext3 with encryption, but a file system that have seamless hard encryption build into it from the get-go. Like what SSH is for Telnet.
Simply put, the primary boot loader asks for the password, without it nothing is accessible.
Or does this already exist for consumer level implementation?
what does it spell?
It's funny how what one side says is FUD is simply viewed as "insightful" and "forward-thinking" by the other side.
They already are collecting all wired signals.
And, of course, there are no laws in places for wireless signals - those can be legally picked up by anyone
Physical media was the last safe way to bring data into the US.
If you don't think that all network traffic going in and out of the US is safe from government snooping, you're smoking crack. Now, whether or not they are able to decrypt VPN or other encrypted traffic is another question.
Aren't there easier ways of bringing in naughty pictures and files than sneakernet?
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
If I ever need to sneak data across the border I'm going to get Johnny Mnemonic. Ice-T and a dolphin can help me get to it.
"There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
Everyone quotes the Constitution and argues law.
Perhaps it would be better to consider a quotation from the Declaration of Independence. Remember that document? The one that put the whole lot of dirty laundry out for all to see and said:
"We Aren't Going to Stand for This Anymore"
(quotes, ed.)
Decades of abuse by a government out of control were a major cause of a war for independence. Could these same abuses, now at the hands of the current government be the seeds for a true revolution?
Looking back over the decades of dirty politics and lies perpetrated by America's elected officials and their bureaucracies, I am able to see at least some glimmer of acting in the common good. I'm not saying that it was all proper and that it was not often criminal. I am saying that I see nothing in the last 20 years that was done for any purpose but to line the pockets of a politician or corporation at our expense and to our detriment.
As though the rape of our financial well being is not sufficient, now the government seeks to remove any and all means to communicate in privacy, and to do without due process or allowing us any capability to seek redress.
I think that perhaps you should all read the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps with a mind for a couple slight updates? I think we need to publish a new one.
"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is in the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security."
It should be noted that Ron Paul and Eliot Engel sponsored legislation on July 31 to
ensure that a traveler entering the United States would be subject to searches of their data and digital equipment only if a border agent has a reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.
Oh that Ron Paul, what a whack job! It's a shame he doesn't realize that the system is already fucked beyond our control and that he's simply giving those Americans foolish enough to listen to him a false glimmer of hope.
Your brain is not a computer.
...but the NSA already searches international net traffic entering the US. Doesn't most anyone who cares know this? Note I don't much care :-)
First of all, most of you *worrying* this issue have gone back to work and will do nothing else about it. Nothing.
Second, based on the responses to the summary, I only see a few people who actually have some experience crossing borders. The rest of you need to unplug the cable TV, turn off the PC and do something else. Like travel, or get involved in a political issue like this one....
Third, the wisest travellers among us use the laptop like a thin client. Mail? Web-based or something else, definitely not POP. Media? MPD is nice. Any national interest can have my laptop because they'll find nothing. Now before you jump to the conclusion that I'm relying on "I've got nothing to hide" I'm not.
This is practical advice. Take it.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
I have a simple recipe for this. Take 1 part Flash drive add pinch of data. Now put it all in an envelope with a stamp and address. Viola. Security through the border.
then the whole world will route all communication through europe, and hell, maybe even set up their own registrar authorities and root dnses, internet will become fractured, your backbone providers will lose HUGE customers, and then will shove all those fibers they laid up their asses.
thats why.
Read radical news here
Old news. They've been doing this for years. And they've handed out 'get out of jail free' cards to anyone who assists them.
Have gnu, will travel.
you reap what you sow. George II has been the gift of pro republican people to the WORLD, not even only u.s., and we are thanking you for this wonderful present, like in the form the parent to your post does.
thank you, for all those terrible years.
Read radical news here
Right... that'll help. Social Security, Welfare, Medicare and Medicaid exceed the entire military AND discretional budget (not just the Iraq war) and all are horribly broken. * Social Security: 1935, FDR... democrat * Welfare: 1935, FDR... democrat, reformed in 1996 by Bill Clinton... democrat AGAINST the democratic party's wishes for longer terms and more funds. (thank the universe for little miracles.) * Medicare and medicaid: 1945 proposed by Harry Truman... democrat, signed 1965 by Lyndon Johnson also... democrat.
these are the stuff you complain of. stuff that YOU CAN YOURSELF USE.
so you are complaining about social security, welfare, medicare, medicaid, health insurances, BECAUSE they take away your money, but youre ok with PAYING $500 BN A YEAR TO A WAR THAT ONLY BENEFITS HALIBURTON & ASSOCIATES ?
are you a TOTAL moron ? you are stomaching paying for something that you will see NO returns, NO profits, take NOTHING back, but youre complaining about social security ?
apparently youre ok as long as the tax you pay does not benefit anyone INCLUDING you, but IS SPENT TO TRASH IN A FOREIGN WAR TO BENEFIT SOME CORPORATIONS CLOSE TO ADMINISTRATION.
excuse me, but people like you do not have the mental prowess to have the right to vote. go back to an obscure farm in midwest, and dont bother anyone.
Read radical news here
... its evident that this has nothing to do with terorists and homeland security. Its all about p0rn.
If they were really afraid of al Qaida types, they'd be looking for data going out through the borders as well as coming in.
Have gnu, will travel.
i really am very annoyed with you american republicans these days. you are TOTALLY contradictory even about yourself.
you talk about right to compete, do business, other financial rights, complain about taxes and size of government.
WHO is going to protect your rights, in all respects of life, leave aside business, from predators and abusers, if the government is cut to shreds ?
the government is YOUR corporation, its the megacorporation that you are a natural shareholder for, and have an inalienable right in its workings. its your STICK that you use to scare off any predators and set matters right. if you are not able to properly use it, thats your problem.
we need LAWS RULES AND REGULATIONS in ALL aspects of SOCIAL life, because in EVERY human society, EACH period of time, there are always individuals and groups that are ready to abuse, subdue others and get their way.
implementation of such rules and regulations is THE thing that made possible for us to step from caves to space age. its THE thing that made the 7 billion populated world possible.
yet, you republicans are, somehow, either too stupid, or TOO selfish not to realize that, business, running of a country is NO different than ANY other SOCIAL activity that mankind performs, and as soon as the regulatory power, the government is scuttled as much as you want it to be, there will be predators, abusers everywhere.
ah, and also, stuff like 'invisible hand' does not exist. its not even a fairy tale. business is just another field of social activity, and deregulation brings equal amount of lawlessness and abuse to it just like any other social aspect of life.
no, excuse me, you really dont know whats good for you.
Read radical news here
Greater than all those sins, I think, is one you can lay squarely on Lyndon Johnson's doorstep: raiding the Social Security 'Trust Fund' and moving it to the general fund where it could be piddled away. (Part of the Social Security Act of 1965.)
Not that Social Security was ever a great idea (well, almost; in its very original incarnation, it was supposed to be PAYGO and accounts were supposed to be individualized -- this was how FDR sold the program); it's a Ponzi scheme that's premised on never-ending economic and population growth, which is pretty obviously unsustainable in the long run no matter how you cut it.
But once the trust fund was broken into by Johnson, that's when it really started to go down the tubes. If SS monies aren't safe during economic upswings (like when it was raided -- when all the Boomers were paying into it), it can't possibly work. Since it's been made abundantly clear that Congress and the Federal government in general can't be trusted with a giant pot of money like that, there's simply no way to make it work long-term. Any safeguard that could be placed on the money could also be undone; there's no 'lockbox' or 'safe' that couldn't be broken into by a sufficiently well-motivated legislature. And the amount of money that would necessarily be in a retirement system would be more than sufficient motivation.
It's always amazed me that Lyndon Johnson never gets more nominations when people start asking about the "worst president". Up until our current Fearless Leader took office, Carter always seemed to get that spot -- and although Carter was a fool, the damage he caused was nowhere near as severe as Johnson's hackneyed attempts at social engineering from on high.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
its the nixon that has escalated the war into a full scale war.
you should cut down on Fox coolaid. for you are totally brainwashed. its HISTORY.
Read radical news here
Plus I assume you are referring to Obama, but lets not forget he voted for FISA. We as a people need to figure it out that charismatic != honest and to take whatever either candidate says with a very large grain of salt. Remember, they only care about your vote and will gladly promise you the moon to get it. You'd think we would have learned this with President Bush II promising us a classical conservative utopia yet delivering a neo-conservative hell, but I guess we're all a little slow on the uptake.
obama explained the situation. though its not like people who were following c-span were not aware of it already anyway.
its like this - the current state of the eavesdropping is worse. its subject to NO judicial authority.
democrats didnt have the power to completely scuttle fisa. it was going to be either a status quo (and therefore wiretapping goes on without any judicial authority, upon whim) because they did not have enough majority to pass anything to the contrary, or it was going to be a compromise. they shoved in the judicial authority stuff therefore, making wiretapping a judicial matter. so in the new situation, wiretappers will be hold liable to answer to judges if they do any wrongdoing.
Read radical news here
than your freedoms.
for you can make more money. but you cant gain more freedoms.
Read radical news here
"Duhhh... excuse me Sir, but we think you may have memorized some information - please step this way, our surgeon will need to remove a part of your brain that we think may hold sensitive information....Oh and Welcome to the USA!"
What would the border agents make of a linux laptop - one that didn't start X automatically ...
And when it did had compiz running on crazy settings ?
(you can hide messages behind windows in compiz - like - death to the usa , etc ...)
After all, any country is safer if nobody wants to go and visit it anymore.
This is true, but practical along the same lines as, "If we kill everyone in the whole world, there will be no crime or terrorisim."
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I can't help but think that all this grousing and insightful commentary is being read, analyzed and applied to CBP practices and planning.
From my cursory read of the previous story about businesses and entities that are non-individuals, it seems an individual person has to go the expensive route of forming an international company, headquartered outside the US. But, having a purported residence in the States, one is going to quickly get caught up in IRS and state and county and local ordinances and laws stating that ANY business activity or equipment IN that state being used in or for a business activity constitutes a business presence.
Thus, we who THOUGHT "Oh, I'll just form a business and... add "notification of confidentiality/business proprietary data/client private/privileged information/ etc..." " will end up paying a steep price of business formation, ongoing taxes and fees, and STILL face the prospect of being IRS-deemed a non-business, and STILL being looked up prior to flight and after return to the border and determined to be an individual trying to become shielded under exemptions grudgingly given to BUSINESSES and various political functionaries, doctors, lawyers, engineers/architects (all "professionals"), psychiatrists/psychologists/medical professionals, and so on.
This is very fucked up. The (modern, US) government is not supposed to be generating grief, resentment, revulsion, non-patriotic feelings, and feelings of "why don't you just fucking EXILE me, you contemptuous FUCKS". It's supposed to protect us AND respect our rights. As one previous comment and blogger pointed out, if CBP and other agency searching excludes application and data traffic over the Internet, then having a laptop is an intermediary device, not all that different from routers and switches and nodes NOT BEING SEARCHED.
But, you see, they probably fail to realize that those items ARE NOT NEEDING to be searched, given the AT&T & other telcos' net vacuum cleaner centers like the one that moved out of it's near-Folsom street location that was in the news. So, from the 3-letter agencies' perspective, your/my laptop constitutes an obstruction, an impediment, a NUISANCE to their will and desire to KNOW what they want to KNOW. It all sounds like that phrase "TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS; ANYWHERE, ANYTIME", and it's going to get a LOT of people burned.
So, they seize laptops, ostensibly because the target IS a valid, bonafide threat and OUGHT to be deprived of hardware and software, and then there are mistakes (genuine ones due to on-the-spot decisions in the lack of complete information or due to inter-agency information deprivation), and THEN there are reprisal snatches. LOTS of us here ranting and bitching about this are probably on a major SHIT LIST, probably racking up negative Karma in the eyes of those agencies. The negative Karma MIGHT even extend to ANY of loved ones.
Anybody remember "Serenity", when the assassin said something like, "When you quarry goes to ground, leave no ground for the quarry to go"? OTOH, they may have all these hearings and assertions and rules in place just to deter terrorists and data thieves and torrent abusers from being to cavalier. Maybe the agencies just want this card as an ace up the sleeve. Maybe they aren't really all that much USING the power they currently have. But, you can bet your ASS that every single ONE of use here, whatever firewalls and pseudonyms we think are protective and anonymizing, they know who MOST of us are by unique identifying information. If they SO CHOOSE, they can inconvenience ANY ONE of use, once or repeatedly. Well, until enough of us post that we've been relieved of our property and HONESTLY have no crime-related activities (is in-forum raging against the State a crime yet, worthy of State reprisal?) associated in our lives.
Even if the criminals and suspects relieved of laptops and electronics came clean and torrented what they HAD in their possession during confiscation, the government agencies would either slap th
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
In other words, there must be a warrant issued that explicitly specifies all of these various items, before any such search or seizure may take place. Simply searching everything and everyone crossing the border wholesale, on the off chance that you *might* find *something*, but who knows what, is entirely unconstitutional. And as such, any law requiring and / or "authorizing" such dragnet operations is itself null and void, an illegal law.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Preventing customs agents from searching laptops "would open a vulnerability in our border by providing criminals and terrorists with a means to smuggle child pornography or other dangerous and illegal computer files into the country"
Jesus Christ! EMAIL motherfucker, EMAIL! Why in the name of god would you WALK illicit material into the country?
In Sweden we already have this extension. At least
the law passed quite recently that gives the
Swedish National Defence Radio Establishment right
to eavesdrop on all Internet traffic crossing
Swedish borders.
BTW, the NDRE bought one of the worlds most
powerful super computers, it is now in 11th
place, before the law was passed. How could
they be so sure that they would be able to put it
to Good(TM) use?
In order for it to even be a search - before the probable cause analysis even comes in - there must be a reasonable expectation of privacy (REP). This has been the standard for decades, and SCOTUS decides what is constitutional and what isn't (they can't only be the arbiter of the Constitution when you like what they say - you can't have it both ways).
There simply isn't REP at borders. So legally, it isn't a "search" for Fourth Amendment purposes. So probable cause isn't even a consideration.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
"The freedom we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbor for doing what he likes..."
Thus Pericles described the greatness of Athens in his funeral oration.
encrypted data transfers? To make this work without notice to the sender or recipient, there'd have to be a back-door built into all crypto. I think a lot of companies would prefer to simply stop doing business in America.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Bro, not so much caffeine, ok? Relax...
TANSTAAFL GIGO Acronyms to live by!
From here : At a Senate hearing in June, Larry Cunningham, a New York prosecutor who is now a law professor, defended laptop searches--but not necessarily seizures--as perfectly permissible. Preventing customs agents from searching laptops "would open a vulnerability in our border by providing criminals and terrorists with a means to smuggle child pornography or other dangerous and illegal computer files into the country," Cunningham said.
What I want to know is who exactly "smuggles" child pornography around on a laptop. They may have it on their laptop, but they're not "smuggling" it into the country. They more than likely downloaded it from someplace that's already accessible to anyone in the country anyway.
You may be able to prosecute them for it, but it's not going to save any children. Anyone that wants it will just hide it better, and you'll end up arresting people that have a suspect image or three in their browser cache that they've probably never even seen. This is just more bullshit fear-mongering to further strip us of our liberties.
Yes I agree with this statement, I was stopped and had my laptop searched for about 1 hour. When they found images of me, my girlfriend, and two other girls ( a great threesome I had ) the officer begin to take his time searching my drive.
The worse thing about it were the questions, "are you sure she was 18", "are there any other images", all the while the other passengers walking by and viewing everything on my laptop screen.
Quite humiliating. Since then I travel with a vanilla laptop and do everything remote to my home.