New Bill To Rein In DHS Laptop Seizures

twigles writes with news of a new proposed bill that seeks to curtail DHS's power to search and seize laptops at the border without suspicion of wrongdoing. Here is Sen. Feingold's press release on the bill. The new bill has more privacy-protecting safeguards than the previous one, which we discussed last month. "The Travelers Privacy Protection Act, a bill written by US Senators Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., would allow border agents to search electronic devices only if they had reasonable suspicions of wrongdoing. In addition, the legislation would limit the length of time that a device could be out of its owner's possession to 24 hours, after which the search becomes a seizure, requiring probable cause."

Comments

No, no good enough.

[Animats]

Probable cause required after 24 hours? No. Probable cause must be required before search.

Re:No, no good enough.

[Celarnor]

Think in computer terms. You can't block spam, spam, and only spam. Sometimes you have to block non-spam to catch most of the spam, or you block nothing but the most obvious spam, and still have a trashed inbox.

The two are nothing alike.

When you're filtering spam, you aren't dealing with a person's personal belongings worth at the very least a few dollars plus the contents of the hard drive, which is priceless.

You aren't dealing with something that makes or breaks someones livelihood, you're dealing with something with an email. The two are absolutely nothing alike,and while I'll accept a high false positive rate and a high success rate with spam filtering, I'm not going to accept a high false positive rate with a system that deprives me of physical property and my livelihood for at least 24 hours without any reason.

Re:No, no good enough.

[Wrath0fb0b]

Probable cause required after 24 hours? No. Probable cause must be required before search.

Your views on this political question* are admirable (and I would even agree but the devil's in the details of implementation) but they are also at variance with most of the electorate. For myself, I have (grudgingly) accepted that such political preferences are legitimate even when they conflict with my personal preferences. I have no qualms saying that people are making a big mistake giving up freedom for liberty but, from a point of view of epistemic humility, I also have to concede that they have every right to make the decision.

The best thing we can do is attempt to convince people and that starts first and foremost with acknowledging the legitimacy of their position (while, of course, reserving the right to respectfully disagree).

* Since for 250 years, the Constitution has permitted warrantless, suspicionless searches of anything crossing an international border, it is considered a settled legal question. /.ers can complain that the true meaning of the fourth amendment is something different (I'm sure many will) but the law remains.

Re:No, no good enough.

[Tassach]

most people aren't all bad

Research indicates otherwise:

Dr. Thomas Blass of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County performed a meta-analysis on the results of repeated performances of the [Milgram] experiment. He found that the percentage of participants who are prepared to inflict fatal voltages remains remarkably constant, 61â"66 percent, regardless of time or place

Re:No, no good enough.

[L4t3r4lu5]

Sweet Jesus on a flying carpet, "non-citizens have basically no rights and if they want in they have to do what we tell them"?!

How's your sister / wife, Dwayne? Feel free to come past the 19th Century any time. You do realise Apartheid is over, and you can no longer buy slaves? Your Constitution protects PEOPLE, not citizens. THIS IS THE CRUX OF THE MATTER.

I have never seen a more ignorant response on /. in my life.

If you're trolling, I applaud you. You are extremely good at being a dick.

Accountability

[crossmr]

If they take a laptop to search it for 24 hours they should first detail their "reasonable suspicion" on a form to which the person's whose laptop is being taken receives a copy to chat with their lawyer about.

Mod parent up.

[SanityInAnarchy]

It's a bit like saying the police can break down my door and search my apartment for 24 hours before I can complain.

I think I speak for all of us when I say: FUCK NO.

Re:Mod parent up.

[davester666]

This is funny.

Didn't FISA get revised just this year (combined with giving immunity to the telephone companies involved with illegal wiretapping), so that the NSA can wait up to two weeks AFTER beginning to wiretap a phone line, to apply for the warrant to do the wiretapping? Even though there are rubber-stamp FISA judges available on speed-dial 24/7/365. All you need to do is make a long-distance phone call to a person and/or a phone number that somebody thinks is associated with terrorism (no evidence required for this belief!).

Re:Mod parent up.

[Ian Alexander]

Consider that, as it stands, they're under no requirement to give you anything back at the border, ever, and I'd say a 24-hour cutoff before they needed a warrant to seize your stuff would be better than nothing.

Re:Mod parent up.

[davester666]

Yes, that is true. But they also altered the law for calls entirely within the US. That long distance call you made, that somebody decided, entirely without any actual evidence, that was to a phone number similar to somebody that is suspected of being linked to a terrorist (which pretty much covers EVERYBODY), that they started wiretapping your phone for, without a warrant. They can share ALL the calls you make (including entirely within the US) with local and state police and the FBI. Without a warrant.

And once they finally have to apply for the warrant, if the rubber stamp FISA court somehow decides not to authorize it, the NSA can appeal, and keep wiretapping your line for another 30 days, still without a warrant, until another FISA court has to hear the appeal and may finally deny the warrant, and they have to take the wiretap off.

But then the President just hands out a letter (do we even know if the gov't is keeping records of their secret wiretapping?) or just indicates in some way to keep wiretapping you anyway, in the name of national security. Like he has already been doing for years.

Re:Mod parent up.

[SanityInAnarchy]

I realize this.

I also think it's a blatant violation of the Bill of Rights.

I realize said Bill of Rights is often trashed by our government. Is there something else I don't know about the rationale for treating me as anything other than a citizen at the border?

To draw a completely inappropriate analogy, it's like Spore's DRM. Sure, five activations is better than three. I still say any game telling me how many times I can install it on my own computer should not be allowed, and I'm quite offended at the attempt to throw me a bone.

Where are the Republicans?

[pete-classic]

Why on Earth isn't this bill co-sponsored by a Republican? Have they stopped even paying lip-service to freedom?

Ten years ago the Republican party had two things going for it, fiscal conservatism and a strong stance on freedom. What happened? (It would be easy to say, "George Bush", but I refuse to believe that he could have done it single handedly.)

-Peter

In our current political climate

[ZorbaTHut]

I'd also like to know what measures the bill takes to prevent the border guards from saying "well, we lost it, sucks to be you". Does it have guarantees spelled out? If my laptop gets "lost" while they have it, will they buy me a new one? Will someone lose their job or go to jail over it?

Because if the answer is "no", then at this point I just plain don't believe it will matter.

Odd way to terrorize people...

[GameboyRMH]

Yes, there is an order of magnitude of difference between a penis pill e-mail and a terrorist, but the general principle is the same.

So you're saying that terrorists want to enlarge my penis by an order of magnitude greater than the pills? Well I guess a massive penis could be rather threatening, but how would the terrorists make use of my terrifyingly huge penis? Write a message on it? Or maybe they're just trying to get the point across that they have to ability to produce Wangs of Mass Destruction?

Re:Odd way to terrorize people...

[commodoresloat]

Well I guess a massive penis could be rather threatening, but how would the terrorists make use of my terrifyingly huge penis?

Well, he said it would be a pain in the ass.

Note: The bill applies to US citizens only

[Joce640k]

If you're a foreigner, you're screwed.

Re:still won't convince me to visit the usa

[Phantom of the Opera]

government sponsored theft of your property. fuck that.

Taxes?

No Highway for you!

To take or not to take?

[kaos07]

This is particularly relevant to me as I'm travelling to the US next month. I'll be there for a couple of months so taking my laptop is kind of a necessity but really don't know what the hassle's going to be like at the border and whether it's worth it. I'm not particularly worried about them spying on my files since there isn't anything sensitive there and if there was, I could upload it onto a secure server and then download it once in the States but even that is a somewhat depressing course of action to take when entering the "land of the free".

It's almost as if they don't want visitors, tourists, skilled workers?

Mail it

[ArchieBunker]

Seriously. You will have a tracking number and a guarantee it will arrive. If I have to fly somewhere within the USA my clothes and belongings are going by Fedex. They don't seem to care if my tube of toothpaste is 3.04 ounces.

Re:Not necessarily

[ForumTroll]

I'm Canadian and I definitely wouldn't classify our health care system as a "failed idea." It's not perfect, but I bet most Canadians would agree that it's far better than the system you have.

Re:More than a pita

[Kamokazi]

Unless you're hiking in the wilderness (in which case you probably didn't need it too badly), you will have a hotel address your laptop can be shipped to rather easily.

IANAL, but probable cause is much more than just reasonable suspicion. Soemthing along the lines of having other evidence against the person than what you gathered simply by noticing something at customs.

Re:Not necessarily

[plasmacutter]

I'm such a leech.

I mean.. i ate right, have never been overweight, got plenty of exercise, and was diagnosed with crohns at age 17.

Now im out of college, unable to get insurance of any kind, and suffering from excruciating pain, chronic diarrhea, and lethargy approaching narcolepsy, all because I can't get 2 perscriptions which would make it all go away

This is because of authoritarians like you who believe in "guilty until proven innocent"

I Do Not Understand

[LuYu]

Maybe it is just me, but I do not see how Congress is supposed to be passing bills or laws that give people back their Constitutionally guaranteed Rights . The Fourth Amendment protections are above the law, and the DHS is violating the Constitution -- the origin of all law in the US -- by practising these seizures. Why is a law necessary to prevent the DHS from violating the Father of All Law, the fundamental document without which the US could not claim to be a "Free Country"?

Re:More than a pita

[YttriumOxide]

The problem with travelling to the US is that they don't even let you past the gates without a valid address. I discovered this on my first visit there several years ago. I was staying in a hotel in Connecticut, but didn't know the address (my colleagues would pick me up from the airport and take me there), but I flew in to Los Angeles and was to transfer to a domestic flight to get to CT. I was tied up at the checkpoint for about 4 hours while they tried (and tried and tried and tried) to call the CT office to make sure I was "legit" and to get the address of the hotel. It didn't occur to them that due to the timezone difference, everyone had already gone home for the day and the cleaning staff generally don't answer people's office phones. All this time, they just left me waiting around, not allowed through.
Eventually, they came to me and asked for an number back in my home country (Australia at the time) and after waiting another hour for someone to get in to the office there (don't forget the joy of timezones), they finally got through to someone, got the cell number of a guy in CT, woke him up (it was pretty late by that point), got the address and then let me through. NEVER again will I travel to the US without having an address written down somewhere!

Actually, thinking about it, never again will I travel to the US unless COMPLETELY necessary. If I need to have a meeting with my colleagues from the US again, they can bloody well fly over here to Germany (where I now live/work).

Re:Not necessarily

[Jedi Alec]

Ultimately only you are responsible for your own health and happiness. If you're not willing to do whatever it takes to secure those things for yourself, do not blame others. It's your choice not to act.

And that, in a nutshell, is why a lot of people can't stop scratching their heads about the way things are done in the good ol' US of A.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's immoral or wrong in any way, just that a good chunk of the rest of the western world feels there's such a thing as the common good which supercedes the individual.

And to put this in economical terms, what's the cost/benefit of providing the GGP with socially funded medicine, which most likely means he'll be able to function as a tax-paying, consuming, creditcard-using citizen instead of having to sit at home being a drain on society through other channels? In many cases a short-term investment in people that have fallen "through the system", so to speak, can make a huge difference both to their own welfare as well as their ability to contribute to society as opposed to having to depend on it.