Slashdot Mirror
Bill To Add Accountability To Border Laptop Search
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) has introduced a bill that would add accountability to the DHS searches conducted upon the laptops of those crossing the border. Specifically, it would require the issue of receipts to those who had their property confiscated so that it could later be returned, would limit how long the DHS can keep laptops, would require them to keep the laptop's information secure, and would create a way to complain about abuse. Finally, the DHS would be required to keep track of how many searches were done and report the details to Congress. Rep. Sanchez also has also issued a statement about the proposed bill."
Her suggestion only applies to US citizens, though. What about the rest of us?
Move sig!
Thankfully, it will be tagged with all kinds of obscure spending bullshit so that the Dems can posture about freedom and liberty while still stealing our money. The Republicans of course will either try to tack on their own spending or stand up and blather about security while pointing out how noble they are for voting it down because of all the Democrat spending bills attached.
Either way, we can be pretty much assured that things like this that take power away from the government will never really see the light of day and both parties will get their "cater to the base" points in for bringing it up and bickering about it.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
sucks to be them.
you think that businessmen, travelers will still maintain u.s. as a destination of choice, if this shit of a practice stays the same ? hell, or even just stays though changed ?
there are heaploads of countries in the world to travel to and do business with.
Read radical news here
What a sensible and normal human response to this situation--Rep Sanchez is acting like a human being, ensuring that our rights are protected. This must mean that Sanchez is toast and will be voted out of office shortly. It always happens. Somebody in power sees the light and attempts to do the right thing. For their sins they are booted out of Washington. Just you watch... Her successor will favor total immunity for Customs.
Are you telling me that currently, the DHS doesn't have to do any of these simple things that should have been required of them in the first place? This is just a pathetic showing of how out of touch Americans are with their privacy rights and how stupid we are for keeping the regime responsible for this in as long as they have been.
Man, I got into the wrong field, I should have become a border agent so I could my hands on free laptops every day.
I must be reading that wrong because it sounds like Congress doing something that makes sense. It's unfortunate that it takes legislation to get DHS to pull their collective head out of their butt. This should never have been a problem that needed solving.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
That people will be more secure when they search laptops for.....ehm...terrorists?
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
Cause there's no legitimate reason to do so.
What happened to reasonable search and seizure again? And don't gimmie the bullshit about this being the border, and thus completely outside the scope of normal legal protections. It's one thing to look for smuggled goods or potentially disease carrying goods, etc. But nothing you can carry on a laptop can't just be transmitted past customs over the internet. There's no actual reason to search peoples electronics at the border.
Finally , someone that sees something wrong with present day situation for abuse of power at border crossings.
This is not suddenoutbreakofcommonsense. The original bill should never have passed in the first place, and common sense would be to remove it again.
:)
While this bill is a step in the right direction it also indirectly legitimates the original bill by not outright removing it. They have no business to search my laptop should I come to the US, not in any way, and not in a limited way either. Period.
I understand why they have to do searches pre-flight. You certainly don't want people sneaking dangerous materials, weapons, etc. on a plane flying at high speed miles above the ground.
And I can understand why they would want to check the hardware of laptops to ensure that they're really laptops and not disguised bombs or weapons of some sort.
But what I cannot fricken understand is why they check data on laptops. Is someone really going to drop a plane out of the air because a laptop has porn on it?! Is someone really going to high-jack a plane because he has a hard drive full of copyright infringing MP3s?!
Searching data on a laptop has absolutely no relationship to the reason for pre-flight searches. It will not protect anyone and is done solely as a fishing expedition get around the US Constitution. You'd think conservatives would want to protect our Constitution. But you'd be completely wrong.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Meanwhile, terrorists will just encrypt their data on thumbdrives and shove 'em up their ass.
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine No Posessions?'" -- Elvis Costello
It is nice to see Bill doing his job. Most legislation gets passed because of Neil and Bob.
Trust me - I don't want to visit the US. But working for a multi-national company, I may have to for business. The war on tourism (that has accompanied the war on terrorism) makes it a very unpleasant and scary experience.
Yep, it doesn't even mention the word "citizens". The bill itself is quite short and makes a lot of sense.
Take a look: HR 6869: Border Search Accountability Act of 2008
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
I found a link on Thomas for the actual bill: Border Security Search Accountability Act of 2008 (Introduced in House). Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but hopefully it can clear up questions as to whether it applies only to U.S. Citizens, or to *anyone* who is crossing the border.
BTW: This is the PROPOSED text of the bill. It's by no means a law, yet, and is certainly subject to amendment before/if it ever it gets voted on.
As a non-USian, I might be clueless, but wouldn't it be easier for congress to simply stop said department (an extension of the US government) snooping people's data? It's not as if child pron (as an example) will make a plane fall out of the sky or crash into a building. And if they have good reason to believe one carries such data, aren't the normal, legal routes (warrants etc.) sufficient?
Seems this politico does not want the state to give up it's unlawfully usurped power over the population - just make it seem more palatable without needing any real action - DHS is a branch of government after all, and who else will the complaints go to than the government?
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
Now all they need to do is curb fingerprinting of holiday-makers, pre-boarding name checking against inaccurate and ineffective no-fly blacklists, and the general criminal treatment of anybody without a US passport, currently with little more rights than cattle outside the border, who wants to spend THEIR money on YOUR culture.
I use the term "culture" loosely. (If that gets me a troll mod, so be it.)
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Why is this tagged suddenoutbreakofcommonsense? A sudden outbreak of common sense would be if the DHS simply stopped searching peoples laptops. It's not like the border is in any way impermeable to unauthorized and unsnooped data anyway. In a way this is just like DRM. It doesn't affect those who know how to get around it, and the rest aren't worth bothering about.
personally I think getting a receipt for your stolen property only increases the indignity of the entire situation.
"That is your receipt for your husband, thank you, and this is my receipt for your receipt."
This bill is NOT a sudden outbreak of common sense. A sudden outbreak of common sense would be to abandon this idiotic practice for the security theatre it is.
And people wonder why I left and don't like returning to the USA. California uber alles.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
* Unreasonable searches and seizures must be done with a smile or the next one is free
* Verbal abuse from border agents must refrain from using racial/ethnic epithets
* Coupon good for a free McDonald's Happy Meal issued to every person detained without charges by DHS
(Offer valid to U.S. citizens only. Void where prohibited.)
* Michael Chertoff must pinky swear not to laugh when asked if any complaints submitted to DHS are actually, you know, linked to their accountability.
It will only die if you let it. That's the way this country works, if something doesn't have much support it will die. It's a government of the people and if the people are silent or if only a few speak up then that means maybe the bill should be left to die.
Oh, and griping on slashdot doesn't count either, though I know there are a huge number of people who think it does (or worse, should). Sites like this are great at creating an illusion of support.
If this is important to you then start a public awareness campaign and get out there and let people know how important this bill is. If you and everyone else doesn't then this bill might die.
We lost our rights when they said they could search our cars without a warrant and we did not shoot the bastards.
Welcome to slavery.
Andy Out!
Neither in Mexico, nor in Canada did I ever experience such abyssimal treatment by border officials then in the US. Last I read, both are part of America.
Thus USians is valid in this context.
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
No, it isn't. YOU are wrong, he is correct.
While the United States of America is located WITHIN the continent of North America, (which it gets it's name from) the PROPER term for people from the U.S.A. is "Americans". It is the short form of "Citizens of the United States of America". People from Canada (also part of North America) would take exception to being called "Americans". Not because they necessarily dislike America or because they think Canada is on a different continent, but because it is INCORRECT. Citizens of the Sovereign Nation of Canada are called "Canadians".
Also, Mexico is part of the continent of Central America. These people would ALSO take exception to being called Americans, they are "Mexicans". In case you cared, We also have "Colombians", "Peruvians", "Brazilians", "Argentinians", and many others, NONE of which think they should be referred to as "Americans". That appellation belongs solely to citizens of the United States of America.
Intentionally using incorrect terminology in an attempt to lessen the prestige of a country by removing the continent name from which the country name is derived is INSULTING and a rather juvenile attempt at belittling citizens of that country. It makes you look petty, small, and stupid.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
Child porn is not a legitimate reason to have our rights taken away.
First of all, the damage has already been done. Once it's on media of some sort, the 'child' has already been abused. Destroying copies won't undo the event.
Secondly, are you *sure* it's actually CHILD porn? Are the guards going to verify the identity and age of all the participants? No, they will not. CG, drawn, ageplay all equal child porn to them. Plus it gives them a great excuse to confiscate any device or media and detain any person they want. Good luck trying to prove it was the DHS that loaded some kiddy porn on your device after they had confiscated it and sent you off to an all expenses paid vacation in Cuba.
If you really cared about those harmed by child porn you'd be more concerned with preventing the creation of it, not hindering after-the-fact distribution. But continue on with your doubleplus good bellyfeel campaign. It's probably too scary for you to have any rights (and the commensurate responsibilities) but it's not your call to diminish my rights just so you can _feel_ secure.
Aren't we the people that can make this a real hassle?
I mean - I think any search without a warrant is def. unconstitutional and I don't care if it is for my safety. The most I can do when I drive is watch out around me, but that doesn't mean some asshole isn't going to sideswipe me cause they are on the phone. But don't say I can't talk on the phone when I drive because others are incompetent. Same thing with all this terrorism prevention bullshit.
Look at DRM or any security measure enacted on a computer. This is always what I tell people: when groups of people get together they will always find a way to break the box. So why don't we make the box easy to break and then we don't have to search for the super complicated ways with which people are trying to break into the box? They will most likely choose the easiest methods which we will know cause we made the box
But back to my original point. Someone here, who is a U.S. citizen, and works for a large company, put important and time sensitive data on your laptop. Then encrypt the shit out of it.
But make it look somewhat suspicious, but not enough so it actually is suspicious (think suspicious like a sheriff in TN would think a black male in a BMW is weird).
Then travel through customs, have them snag your laptop and watch them hold onto it for a long time trying to break your encryption.
Get large corp to sue. Sometimes our litigation is worth it.
While some of my conservative peers may disagree as to the utility of the bill, it proposes wide-reaching accountability which can only help us all out.
As a personal anecdote, I travel a lot between two cities in southern New Mexico. Between them is a border patrol point through which I must regularly cross. While most of the border guards are quite friendly and accommodating, I'll occasionally run into a few who are generally in a really foul mood. I've often been asked the usual questions (where are you coming from, where you are going, etc), but from time to time, they've asked me what I'm carrying in my backpack, why I'm carrying it, and so forth. I'm all for discouraging illegal activities, but spending a few minutes answering questions adds up over the course of a month or two! Of course, I don't expect that they'd confiscate my belongings, but I would want some accountability if they did. Since I do need my laptop for working on various things between classes at university, going without it would certainly have real quantifiable repercussions.
I also imagine that most of their questions are directed toward me because I don't look like someone who fits in well in this part of the country--I look European, not Spanish, and most caucasians in this region tend to have darker features, are ranchers (easily identifiable as such), military, or are Germans assigned here with the German air force. As such, I've always figured it was a matter of time until they wind up grabbing a hold of my laptop via random search. Since I write short stories from time to time and have an assortment of partial manuscripts (on an encrypted partition, but who's to say they wouldn't force me to release the password?), I've always been mildly concerned that seizure of my laptop could result in someone who might be less ethical than most obtaining my copyrighted work and illegally distributing it. Yes, I've heard the argument that if I don't want to lose something, don't carry it on my laptop, but that's largely impractical and precisely what encrypting a partition is intended to discourage: petty theft. Thieves who had the means available to break such encryption are probably uninterested in lowly manuscripts and more interested in corporate data or information pertaining to national security. But law enforcement, on the other hand, could potentially force me to divulge such passwords! Perhaps someone who is more familiar with law pertaining to such search and seizures could offer some advice in this particular case.
Considering lost time, productivity, and somewhat valuable materials, it's a bit upsetting that average citizens in this nation have to worry about such ridiculous things. If someone working under law enforcement were to steal data of mine for his or her own benefit, you bet I'd want accountability! I'm sure that sort of accountability does already exist through established channels, but how are you to know that an unscrupulous individual didn't steal something from your computer for his own personal gains (software, mp3s, personal data)? The only downside I see to this bill is that it doesn't highlight an effective method of accountability and detection of theft, such as requiring multiple personnel to be present when examining data to ensure no such theft occurs. That alone could create an additional check and balance within the system.
He who has no
This proposed law, in the guise of restricting the practice of confiscating and/or searching travelers laptops, actually legalizes it. Think about it a moment: by saying "here are the requirements for doing this," implicitly it also says "you can legally do this."
I want it banned. My laptop contains the keys to my life: my bank account, my credit cards, all of my online shopping accounts, everything. It also contains all of my employer's trade secrets. No government staff should have access to that data without court order under any circumstances.
If I have to leave the country, either my laptop won't be coming with me, or I'll be encrypting the contents of its hard drive and shipping it home by UPS. (Or I suppose I could leave a backup at home, transmit any new files to my server from wherever I went, and wipe the hard disk before returning to the US.)
Wow, you've got SEVERAL facts wrong there:
Note that America meaning the USA is the last definition. Merriam-Webster agrees with Oxford.
American noun
1 a native or citizen of the United States.
- a native or inhabitant of any of the countries of North, South, or Central America.
2 the English language as it is used in the United States; American English.
Thus, using the term American when referring to the other people in the landmass also known as America is perfectly correct. Merriam-Webster actually places "citizen of the United States" as the third entry.
Intentionally using incorrect terminology in an attempt to lessen the prestige of a landmass by hijacking the name is INSULTING and a rather juvenile attempt at belittling the test of the inhabitants of that landmass. It makes you look petty, small, and stupid.
Furthermore, not even making the effort of consulting a dictionary (or even Wikipedia) before making evident the flaws in your education makes you look ignorant and pathetic.
And frankly people are entitled to use terms that are not ambiguous.
USian (or USan or USean) works perfectly well to describe a citizen or related entity of that country.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.