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."

28 of 495 comments (clear)

  1. US Citizens only by jevring · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Her suggestion only applies to US citizens, though. What about the rest of us?

    --
    Move sig!
    1. Re:US Citizens only by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't visit.

      Our government is sending a clear message that we don't want you, can't you take the hint.

      Our government has made it clear, non citizens are not humans, and therefor cannot expect human rights. Is it really so hard to understand?

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:US Citizens only by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Almost everything applies to persons, not citizens.

      And yes, I know border searches are thought to be an exception to the fourth amendment.

      Anyway, I think the Congresswoman's statement was a misstatement (or at least hope it is)... I doubt they'll actually say "Well, normally I'd give you a receipt, but you're an alien so fuck you," even given the interactions I've had with CBP staff.

      --
      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
    3. Re:US Citizens only by CaptainZapp · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Great advice, thank you.

      I got the message loud and clear in 2002 (that was before the fingerprinting started) and haven't visited the US since (that's after about 20 previous visits, on which I parted with a significant amount of my tourist Euros).

      While, depending on the airport, immigration to the US was never fun (hello! Miami) the whole affair got absolutely loathsome after DHS called the shots.

      As a matter of fact I even refuse to transfer plains to a third country through the US, since you don't need to collect your bags and go through immigration and customs in transit on just about any European hub.

      To conclude: I got the message loud and clear and here's hoping you're having a nice, slightly fascistic police state that makes all of you feel right at home.

      Just to be clear: I'm not pissing on USians here. But what this administartion pulled off with a disregard of the most basic human rights (hello Mr. Torture President) is so depicable, that I for one certainly don't want anything of it.

      --
      ich bin der musikant

      mit taschenrechner in der hand

      kraftwerk

  2. no by unity100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:no by jacquesm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      correct, I already stopped going to the USA for business & pleasure both.

      I used to travel there three or four times every year, since Bush has come to power and the US went nuts it declined until a few years ago I stopped going completely after one border harassment incident too many.

      The US border guards are on par with some of the worst that I've seen on the east-west German and Polish borders when the Iron Curtain was still firmly in place.

      Funny how things come full circle...

    2. Re:no by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 4, Informative

      I wanted to go the US many years ago, visit New Orleans (pre-Katrina) and soak up the local culture.

      Ever since people have been treated like criminals upon entering the country I decided I would never go to the US, not even if my job demanded it.

      It's a shame though.

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    3. Re:no by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ever since people have been treated like criminals upon entering the country I decided I would never go to the US, not even if my job demanded it.

      My job does demand it ... and I am increasingly thinking it's time to start looking for new employment.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    4. Re:no by jacquesm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, this is only anecdotal evidence, but I've had:

      - my shoes confiscated (steel toes)
      - my laptop and removable drive booted and searched
      - my camera searched (and unfortunately it had a very large flash card in it so that took a while)
      - my fingerprint taken as if I'm some common criminal (as opposed to a classy criminal)
      - my mugshot taken
      - missed my connecting flight

      All this in Miami on a fucking stopover for an Amsterdam to Panama City flight, in other words I was not even planning to visit the states on that particular trip

      So, that's it for me, no more US of A, I'll see you guys on the flip side of the revolution, if it happens in my lifetime I'll be happy but I'm not holding my breath for it.

      If that's the face you want to present to the outside world then I wish you good luck.

      For the record, I've been a pretty outspoken critic of the Iraq war, both in private emails as well as in public writings, possibly that reason enough to 'flag' me. Makes you wonder about the kind of society America is becoming.

    5. Re:no by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Funny
      There is also a test that consists of fitting a square peg into a round hole.

      Is that about the practical ability to perform full cavity searches?

    6. Re:no by Dog-Cow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've said many times since 9/11/01 that Bush is the greatest terrorist the world has ever known. No one in recorded history has managed to terrify upwards of millions of people in such a short amount of time.

    7. Re:no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      what happened to the guys who saved Europe from fascism 60 years ago?

      They had some economic problems then invaded Georgia. Why?

  3. Good Lord! by MistaE · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Good Lord! by Jesus_666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey, at least the USA have taken one step towards being a free, democratic nation. If they keep it up they might become a respected member of the United Nations in less than twenty years.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  4. How about not searching the laptops at all? by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  5. NOT suddenoutbreakofcommonsense by quadrox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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. :)

  6. I understand... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  7. Re:Bill To Add Accountability To Border Laptop Sea by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is nice to see Bill doing his job. Most legislation gets passed because of Neil and Bob.

  8. Re:Read the Bill itself by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Informative

    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
  9. Actual Text of Proposed Bill by martyb · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  10. Re:Legislating common sense by GaryOlson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This solution only makes sense to a bureaucrat. This is not accountability; this is just another set of hurdles.
    1)How will the laptop be returned? Who will pay the shipping charges?
    2)Will the government pay for damage during confiscation and/or return shipping?
    3)What kind of receipt? Will I have to hand over personal information to identify myself -- which is put in a database and probably not encrypted? What data retention rules will be applied to that database?
    4)Complaints -- another black hole into which citizens communicate and no response is ever received. I suggest the bill require the DHS to pay all damage/theft claims first; then try to obtain a refund if the claim is found false.
    5)Report to Congress? What a waste of time. I want all that information on a GAO audited web page: how many items confiscated, how many were actually forensically investigated, how many returned to the owners, process time from confiscation to return, how many damage claims and how much it cost, how many arrests as a result of confiscation.

    And while they are creating the web page, I want that receipt to provide access to a web page where I and my companies lawyers can track the process of my confiscated equipment. When the item is returned, it will link to the UPS/FedEx tracking number so I can track the return of my item.

    --
    Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
  11. Re:Good to know. by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh hell, you found me out. I took out all the electronics in my laptop and have been smuggling terrorists in it for months now. I guess I'll have to put them in my shampoo bottle... what? No shampoo bottles either? Wow, those guys are doing a heckuva job, Brownie!

  12. Re:Obvious missing option by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Informative
    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 specific for the US - making laws is usually easier than getting rid of them. So, if there's a way to make something that's allowed by law, but which you don't like impractical by saddling it with extra laws, that's usually preferred to repealing the law which allows it in the first place.

    will make a plane fall out of the sky or crash into a building.

    Since any of these searches are done by _customs_, it doesn't matter what or what not the data on the laptop might do to the plane. It has already landed.

  13. receipt by noldrin · · Score: 4, Funny

    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."

  14. !common sense. Security Theatre. by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 4, Insightful
    WHY are they confiscating the computers in the first place? Anyone with even the slightest bit of sense could move huge amounts of data through the interweb, encrypted to and from one anonymous point to another. and if it's encrypted more than once, it's nearly impossible to decrypt. and if you then take that and turn it into a .bmp file, then it just seems to be a collection of static-like images with precious little info. And all you have to do is dump the data to a CDR or DVDR and stick with the rest of your music collection.

    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.
  15. Other changes proposed in the same bill: by JonToycrafter · · Score: 4, Funny

    * 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.

  16. Re:Yes you are by CaptainZapp · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Your correction is wrong.

    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

  17. Re:Still wondering? by Duradin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.