18 ms·

Their point about how other countries will take the US's stance as a cue is somewhat scary. If you try and cross any border it will be relinquishing access to

by Jonnax 10y ago

Their point about how other countries will take the US's stance as a cue is somewhat scary. If you try and cross any border it will be relinquishing access to all accounts. I'm assuming email also comes along with 'social media', since communication is by its definition social. So how do you protect yourself? I think just going with "Don't have any social media" isn't a good answer because the relationship that children growing up today with the internet is almost completely different to even people 10-15 years older than them. Someone having carte blanche access to a person's phone will find something if they want to. Imagine you're in a few group chats, someone mentions doing some drug. And you've just entered a country where that's an instant prison sentence. Maybe some off colour jokes about politicians? Proof to kick you out or at least detain. I imagine we're at the cusp of something much more unsettling. The technology to reverse image search a face is available today. It's pretty easy to make you appear associated with anything, anyone, etc.

masklinn 10y ago
> So how do you protect yourself? Wipe phone when you pass through border, restore afterwards. If you're really paranoid, if the device leaves your presence it's to be considered physically compromised.
- FabHK 10y ago
  Assuming you're going to a place with fast internet. If you're not, it can be a pain.
  - EGreg 10y ago
    You can restore using iTunes backups stored on an encrypted hard drive in a secret volume. Plausible deniability even after decryption. TrueCrypt does this.
    - sah2ed 10y ago
      Be sure that as such powers increase they'll obtain more sophisticated tools to help them catch smart alecks. There's also the possibility of seizure -- not getting your encrypted hard drive back because you refused to co-operate.
      - tr1ck5t3r 10y ago
        How do you know your drive is encrypted? Did you write the program and check the algorithms out manually, or was part of your brainwashing "education" designed to get you used to sitting in a stress position for most of your adult life whilst obediently trusting everything that YOU want to believe, when in reality you are kidding yourself and lying to yourself, just like parents tell lies to their kids so they don't worry? Its amazing what coping mechanisms people make up to handle the brutal realities of life. Heres another example of Fake News or is it? https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-hel...
      - EGreg 10y ago
        But they won't know whether anyone refused to cooperate or not Otherwise you get rubber hose cryptanalysis: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629728 Bruce Shneier's advice: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/07/laptop_security.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/07/laptop_securi...
- vidarh 10y ago
  It is bizarre that we're now having to consider the type of preparation you previously would want to consider for places like China. I'm really not sure if I want to visit the US at all while Trump is in power. Not because I expect the chances of any severe problems are all that huge, but because the growing lack of predictability is just creating sufficient friction.
  - contras1970 10y ago
    It's only bizarre because we've been brainwashed in our youth years into thinking highly of USA, and our adult selves still mourn the loss of simple ethical compass, but that was always only imaginary.
    - vidarh 10y ago
      I don't think I've been brainwashed much with that respect - I spent my youth involved in left wing political organizations that just a few years earlier would have barred me from entry to the US, to the point that I called the US embassy to check before my first entry (they stopped caring after the Soviet Union collapsed), and that means there's almost certainly a file on me with Norwegian security services. I've been highly critical of US governments most of my life. The reason I find it bizarre is that I've visited the US about two dozen times over many years, and while I know there are plenty of issues for many visitors, it used to be fairly predictable who would get stopped, and I used to feel safe that I would not get pulled aside and face more invasive questioning or searches. As I've noted elsewhere, part of what is changing is that it appears this predictability is out of the window: Things like NASA employees stopped or how a few days ago a former Norwegian Prime Minister travelling on a diplomatic passport was stopped. And so. In a way, I suppose, I get to finally experience the uncertainty people from less favoured countries and/or darker skinned/with a muslim sounding name have dealt with for much longer. That is perhaps the only benefit of this mess: It's finally affecting groups of people that may cause it to become politically untenable over time.
  - civilian 10y ago
    We've been searching phones at the US border long before Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/11/30/u-s-border-agents-stopped-journalist-from-entry-and-took-his-phones/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/11/30... You are right to be outraged, but you are wrong to be fearful of Trump. You need to be fearful and angry at the government, regardless of who's the President.
- ephemeral9235 10y ago
  How about a lockdown feature that sends the unlock code to a trusted 3rd party? For corporate phones that should work quite nicely, especially if unlocking would require physical connection to the trusted network. That way you could simply put it into lockdown mode before you enter border checks and not use the phone except for minimal calling features.
  - Spooky23 10y ago
    Nah you just whack it. Most MDMs can wipe the phone or data on it in the event you leave the country.
- foolrush 10y ago
  Wouldn't it make more sense to stop the “Wait and see” approach and organize action against the problem? It strikes me that yielding to unjust approaches is fundamentally problematic on two fronts: - The action of forcing legal citizens to unlock their personal information certainly is questionable constitutionally. - The idea that one can perform these sorts of workarounds is likely biased with privilege.
- XorNot 10y ago
  This is actually what I'll be doing when I visit Hawaii later this year. Same with my laptop. Visiting the US now demands exactly the same measures as visiting China.
pjc50 10y ago
> So how do you protect yourself? Individually? It's extremely difficult other than "try not to appear suspicious" and bring a dumbphone when crossing borders. The real protection is collective. Stopping the current administration is only the beginning; the Democrats are merely "not as bad" on this kind of issue. Broader anti-racism and anti-racist-media action is needed, because otherwise this kind of arbitary brutal border policy will win votes.
- aaron-lebo 10y ago
  Broader anti-racism and anti-racist-media action is needed, because otherwise this kind of arbitrary brutal border policy will win votes. This is an issue much bigger than race and as soon as we stop compartmentalizing it into that it will be better for us all. You turn it into another about race thing and people will tune out. You make people realize they are at risk no matter who they are and they might pay attention. That might sound tone deaf but the reality is people first and foremost care about themselves and their in-group before anything else. It's hard not to.
  - JamilD 10y ago
    I don't know why you were downvoted; while it's true that racial minorities are targeted more often than most, many don't empathize with that. They only care once their own rights are threatened. By making it clear that these issues harm everyone, we can prevent these actions from happening to anyone. People are willing to take away the rights of others, but generally are not willing to sacrifice their own.
  - tn13 10y ago
    Not sure why you are down-voted but this is true. Most of the anti-liberty policies come in disguise of we v/s bad guy arguments. The bad guys are often minorities.
    - jacquesm 10y ago
      > The bad guys are often minorities. I've observed this pattern: 'bad guy' is part of another group? That whole group is bad. 'bad guy' is part of the group of the person speaking: That's just an individual rotten apple, but it does not say anything about all of us.
EGreg 10y ago
Deniability. Have many accounts, some of which have a subsetof your email which is totally safe. They can even be mirrors. Or alternatively, have all your sensitive communication on other channels which leave no trace (in browser history, for instance). Simple! PS: It would be cool if apps let you have steganography... like Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp wouldn't show ALL conversations until you entered a specific password. They could even have groups of hidden conversations. Even if cops know that, they will never be sure if you revealed everything. This may be good or bad for you.
- usefulcat 10y ago
  That presupposes that you can accurately determine exactly what qualifies as "safe" in advance.
  - EGreg 10y ago
    Better than nothing - which is what these apps offer now in terms of incognito sessions.
ephemeral9235 10y ago
See this -^ ? It's a new pseudonymous account. Unless your social network has some kind of insane policy where they only allow you to have a single identity you can use that kind of feature to compartmentalize your activities. Combine that with a phone that lets you have multiple users where you use one for banal activity which you can then show to Big Brother when he comes knocking. And others for anything important. To me having several pseudonyms and also using throwaways is part of standard information hygiene. I also have multiple email addresses, some are set to forward to others (one-way of course), others aren't. I don't know why people aren't teaching that to their children. I also love 4chan for that reason. I can talk to people in a totally ephemeral manner. Identity only exists for the duration of a conversation. Or I don't know, do people also share their grindr adventures by linking that account to twitter these days?
- aaron-lebo 10y ago
  That falls apart with the simplest IP tracking. The government has all that data anyway, I see no reason they couldn't run a "background check" and figure out exactly who you are and what you've done. It's a false sense of security, is it not? It's probably best to assume your opponent isn't completely dumb.
  - ephemeral9235 10y ago
    That depends on what your threat model is. I assume we're talking about random police or border searches of your phone. Not the NSA or some surveillance apparatus which can make warrantless inquiries to your ISP and social network providers at a moments notice. If we're facing a surveillance state without any internal obstructions then yes, far stricter opsec will be needed.
    - aaron-lebo 10y ago
      You're right of course. I guess I'm wondering if border guards at any point in the future will have quick access to a database, presumably with information from a company that has either voluntarily or been forced to provide data. Sir, we just ran your social networking accounts and according to our data you have another Facebook account that you did not provide access to...
RealGeek 10y ago
How about if we reset and delete everything from the phone before crossing any international borders?
- izacus 10y ago
  That would mark you as suspicious (Who doesn't have anything on their phone?) and give you a person of interest treatment.
- iak8god 10y ago
  That would work except that it's super inconvenient.
- ptero 10y ago
  That's how some employers (mine included) already handle work-owned electronic devices: going overseas -- either leave yours behind or pick up a loaner that will be fully wiped on arrival.
  - wheelerwj 10y ago
    people used to look at me like i was crazy because id always wipe my laptop and devices before crossing the border. but its the only way now.
- ProblemFactory 10y ago
  That looks suspicious. Unless you are coming home to your own country, looking suspicious is a good way to get denied entry.
  - prodigal_erik 10y ago
    Maybe employers' security teams should make it known that they routinely instruct employees to do this for business or personal travel.
pveierland 10y ago
> So how do you protect yourself? I don't believe any of the technical solutions mentioned in this thread; using a dumb phone, multiple identities and/or false data for plausible deniability, wiping the phone before passing the border, is viable for a larger number of people. They also fail once a border agent insists on accessing an email account for which they know you have the password. The only protection is through protecting people legally. Once the border agencies can insist on accessing your email and cloud storage before letting you enter the country it seems like any arbitrary thought crime can deny you access.
- psybin 10y ago
  Lying to, or misleading a border agent is a felony in the US.
  - wheelerwj 10y ago
    lying to ANY federal agent is illegal.
- cylinder 10y ago
  Just don't give them any passwords or unlock anything if you are a US citizen. Let them try to detain a US citizen indefinitely for it.
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    I wouldn't want to be that test case for the Trump administration.
  - wfunction 10y ago
    Wasn't this guy a US citizen and didn't he still feel too scared to do this?
    - morgante 10y ago
      Yes, which makes this especially abhorrent. The government insists the searches are only of "visitors." Nobody has an obligation to refuse to comply (and be detained and/or jailed) but if put in this situation I would refuse. I'm not willingly giving up my rights without a court compelling me.
coldcode 10y ago
The result of stories like this will be to chill visiting from other countries (destroying tourism in the country) and likely result in the same treatment by other countries to American citizens. I can't understand why the people who decide these policies think they are harmless.
- basseq 10y ago
  Stories like this have been in the news for many years. Here's one from 2014: http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/supreme-court-phone-warrant-us-border/ http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/supreme-court-phone-warrant-u... And an EFF post from 2011: https://www.eff.org/wp/defending-privacy-us-border-guide-travelers-carrying-digital-devices https://www.eff.org/wp/defending-privacy-us-border-guide-tra... It's also not just the US; here's one from Canada: https://www.cnet.com/news/man-charged-for-refusing-to-give-up-phone-passcode-to-canadian-border-agents/ https://www.cnet.com/news/man-charged-for-refusing-to-give-u... Finally, it's not a policy; the the general differences in due process at the border, as upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court (1997, Ramsey v. United States).
mirimir 10y ago
> So how do you protect yourself? Have all expected social media, with expected contacts (family, friends, colleagues, etc) and activity. But carry disposable stuff, because you can't trust it after it's been taken for inspection. If asked, just say they you're worried about theft ;) Or if you're on business, that it's your employer's policy. Which it should be. For anything that you want kept private, be very careful to compartmentalize it from your meatspace identity.
Syzygies 10y ago
> So how do you protect yourself? We need a "kill code" on secured devices: A separate password that silently resets the device to a saved state suggesting mild use and offering nothing of substance. Alarm systems have these: A code you only enter under duress, that looks like a regular disarm code, but silently summons help. So where are Apple and Google on something similar for our digital privacy?
- BoppreH 10y ago
  IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's destruction of evidence.
  - biafra 10y ago
    Only if you're accused of a crime, right? Which is not the case here. They just want to search your data. Although if you're not a citizen they will probably not let you enter the country.
    - smsm42 10y ago
      > Only if you're accused of a crime, right? Not really. As soon as you know there's an investigation against you, any action to purposely destroy relevant evidence can be used against you, even if there was no formal crime charge yet. For companies, they usually get special letter that instructs them to preserve evidence due to investigation ongoing or lawsuit pending. It is also common in civil cases, where there's no crime to talk about at all. But on a personal level CBP agent saying "we need information on your phone" can be treated as informing you about necessity to preserve evidence, and they may as well just give you a printed instruction saying you have to preserve it. Once they did that, purposely destroying evidence (which is anything they could consider relevant) is a crime. Unfortunately, you are not likely to get off on technicality with this - they know the technicalities much better than you. The whole policy of border being "rights-free zone" needs change, not finding a loophole.
      - biafra 10y ago
draugadrotten 10y ago
> So how do you protect yourself? It is time for all cloud services to provide plausible deniability by allowing for multiple passwords to access the same social account - but where all the passwords except the One allows for only a subset of the account. E.g. logon to Facebook using password 'plausible1' and see only friend 1 and friend 2. Logon to facebook using password 'everything' and see friend 1 and 2 but friend 3 as well.
- psybin 10y ago
  Are you using a system to hide information from us? Answer in the negative and you just committed a felony.
Sir_Substance 10y ago
>So how do you protect yourself? Here, now, today? Set all your accounts up with auto-generated passwords, and store the whole lot in a password vault[1]. Don't bring the password vault file with you when you cross the border. Arrange to acquire it after you have entered the country[2]. Now you can honestly say you don't know any of your passwords. If enough people do this, then this law will be pointless. Also, for the love of god stop bringing your smartphone with you when you travel. Get a $15 quad-band feature phone, and just bring a paper map with you. If you don't need your laptop then leave that behind as well. [1] As much as I hate password managers and see them as a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist, you should probably be doing this by now anyway. [2] The details of this can range from a pre-timed email to a physical handover from someone inside the country, depending on whether you think the border police might detain you and attempt to force you to acquire the password vault.
- DrScump 10y ago
  Also, for the love of god stop bringing your smartphone with you when you travel. Is there a risk of bringing a smartphone with no past context on it (e.g. a previously-unused refurb or new phone)? Even one that has been factory reset would give basic prying eyes nothing to find, barring the use of forensic tools.
  - Kostchei 10y ago
    factory reset will do the job even for forensic tools- the border-class forensic tools- cellebrite, magnet forensics aquire, oxygen, etc are all accessing above the flash translation layer. So deleted is deleted, in that case, on a phone. And chip off is Mossad level expertise, due to chip size/complexity, wear-leveling and said flash translation.
  - Sir_Substance 10y ago
    >Is there a risk of bringing a smartphone with no past context on it (e.g. a previously-unused refurb or new phone)? If you're willing to have two smartphones, or to backup and wipe your smartphone when you travel (don't forget the sim), then I guess not that much. I definitely couldn't be bothered though, hence the cheapie phone. Your mileage may vary if you're going for a 3 months sojourn I guess, I usually do 2-3 day trips. However, back on the sliding scale of paranoia, the main risk of bringing your phone with you if you want next level protection from the US is that if they ever take your phone and remove it from your field if view, you might want to bin it. The US has proven very adept at modifying circuitry of devices to monitor them[1]. A cheap feature phone can be binned without thought. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa...
morgante 10y ago
I'll protect myself by refusing. They can detain me for as long as they want. I'll fight it in court, because I am a US citizen and god dammit they do not have the right to warrantlessly review my encrypted communications. If we've gone so far on the path towards authoritarianism that even citizens don't have rights, I'll just never come back in.
- koolba 10y ago
  > I'll protect myself by refusing. They can detain me for as long as they want. I'll fight it in court, because I am a US citizen and god dammit they do not have the right to warrantlessly review my encrypted communications. While I don't agree it's a good thing, I think they do have the right to detain you indefinitely and/or search whatever they damn well please if it's on your person. I don't think asking for a password that doesn't unlock a device in your possession would pass muster, but unlocking your phone would. Your rights (as a citizen) at the border aren't the same as when you're not there. Also, I think the definition of "at the border" includes anywhere with 100 miles of the physical end of jurisdiction (so effectively you sitting at home in most of the west or east coasts is "at the border"). > If we've gone so far on the path towards authoritarianism that even citizens don't have rights, I'll just never come back in. FYI, I think they have the same right to search you or hold you indefinitely on the way out as well.
  - morgante 10y ago
    > I don't think asking for a password that doesn't unlock a device in your possession would pass muster, but unlocking your phone would. I don't think they can force me to give up my PIN. Not even a court can do that. My rights as a citizen are indeed less, in that they can detain me in an attempt to force compliance. The thing is that it's never been fully tested. In all the cases I've reviewed, either the person relented or CBP eventually let them through. If the detention lasted for days, their case would become harder and harder to make. Someone needs to make a stand. > FYI, I think they have the same right to search you or hold you indefinitely on the way out as well. Perhaps, but leaving is nowhere near as systematic. More importantly: if they were making giving up this info a condition of entry, I would refuse to enter. If they want to lock me up for that, I have a court case.
k-mcgrady 10y ago
>> Their point about how other countries will take the US's stance as a cue is somewhat scary. I don't see this happening, in Europe at least. It seems like a clear violation of the right to freedom of expression and right to family and private life so shouldn't be possible for any of the 47 members of the Council of Europe (who are bound by the ECHR).
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
skriticos2 10y ago
Within Europe (ps: as a European citizen) you can go anywhere with a personal identification card (no passport) and there are no border controls (when walking or driving). There isn't even a border, just a sign: welcome to $country (ps: and maybe local driving instructions). Say what you will about the EU, but this has been a great achievement. I can go through airport security between two EU countries and security will just scan my ID and take a picture in an automated booth and I'm good to go (did exactly that several times). It's like 30 seconds to pass the security gate when entering and no personal interaction. I'm really having difficulty to understand how the United States got from the cradle of freedom (let's say after the civil war, the colonization was not so prestigious) to the capricious and homophobic entity that it is shaping up to be.
- smsm42 10y ago
  Within the states of US you can do the same ;) EU essentially wants to be United States of Europe. Though I'm not sure all EU states yet ready to surrender as much national sovereignty as US states did. And what anything of this has to do with homophobia?
  - popey456963 10y ago
    Donald Trump is undoubtedly homophobic, I think he's just pointing out that for the country to be voting for him, to an extent a proportion of them must agree. And I disagree about you saying the EU just wishes to become the United States of Europe. In almost no sense does anyone give up their "sovereignty" by joining the EU. Every country still creates it's own laws, governs how it wishes to and has full control over what happens to itself. The EU only allows free travel and trade between each of the countries within it and also a standard currency and standard regulations (to enable the free travel and trade to happen in a safe environment).
    - aaron-lebo 10y ago
      Damnit...I hate to look like I'm defending Trump, but he was also the only Republican to let an open homosexual speak on the convention stage (Thiel). He's self-serving and contradictory (see Pence), but it's not nearly as open and shut as suggested. Do you have any specific reasons he's homophobic?
incompatible 10y ago
I'd suggest not even taking a phone if you are visiting the US. You can presumably buy a prepaid phone there if you need one during the trip, and connect it to your existing online accounts.
- incompatible 10y ago
  I guess you could also do a factory reset on an existing phone and set it up once you are through immigration.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
pm90 10y ago
Lying to a border agent can automatically be taken as grounds for refusing entry.
baki 10y ago
yes, yes, but you are not a NASA scientist so don't worry
baki 10y ago
yes, yes, but you are not a NASA scientist so don't worry
bigbugbag 10y ago
Social media is a made word and concept to talk about online services designed to capture and collect and exploit private personal data that the users willingly give them, the "if you're not paying for it, then you're the product being sold". so email does not fall into this IMHO. Not having social media account is the obvious answer, there is little that this will be implemented ever but having a multiple password account could be a workaround. a master password give access to all while another you could give to border guard would transparently limit the access to a sanitized version of the account. The other obvious answer to force the government and lawmakers to remove this policy.

by Jonnax 10y ago

masklinn 10y ago

> So how do you protect yourself? Wipe phone when you pass through border, restore afterwards. If you're really paranoid, if the device leaves your presence it's to be considered physically compromised.

FabHK 10y ago
Assuming you're going to a place with fast internet. If you're not, it can be a pain.
- EGreg 10y ago
  You can restore using iTunes backups stored on an encrypted hard drive in a secret volume. Plausible deniability even after decryption. TrueCrypt does this.
  - sah2ed 10y ago
    Be sure that as such powers increase they'll obtain more sophisticated tools to help them catch smart alecks. There's also the possibility of seizure -- not getting your encrypted hard drive back because you refused to co-operate.
    - tr1ck5t3r 10y ago
      How do you know your drive is encrypted? Did you write the program and check the algorithms out manually, or was part of your brainwashing "education" designed to get you used to sitting in a stress position for most of your adult life whilst obediently trusting everything that YOU want to believe, when in reality you are kidding yourself and lying to yourself, just like parents tell lies to their kids so they don't worry? Its amazing what coping mechanisms people make up to handle the brutal realities of life. Heres another example of Fake News or is it? https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-hel...
    - EGreg 10y ago
      But they won't know whether anyone refused to cooperate or not Otherwise you get rubber hose cryptanalysis: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629728 Bruce Shneier's advice: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/07/laptop_security.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/07/laptop_securi...
vidarh 10y ago
It is bizarre that we're now having to consider the type of preparation you previously would want to consider for places like China. I'm really not sure if I want to visit the US at all while Trump is in power. Not because I expect the chances of any severe problems are all that huge, but because the growing lack of predictability is just creating sufficient friction.
- contras1970 10y ago
  It's only bizarre because we've been brainwashed in our youth years into thinking highly of USA, and our adult selves still mourn the loss of simple ethical compass, but that was always only imaginary.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    I don't think I've been brainwashed much with that respect - I spent my youth involved in left wing political organizations that just a few years earlier would have barred me from entry to the US, to the point that I called the US embassy to check before my first entry (they stopped caring after the Soviet Union collapsed), and that means there's almost certainly a file on me with Norwegian security services. I've been highly critical of US governments most of my life. The reason I find it bizarre is that I've visited the US about two dozen times over many years, and while I know there are plenty of issues for many visitors, it used to be fairly predictable who would get stopped, and I used to feel safe that I would not get pulled aside and face more invasive questioning or searches. As I've noted elsewhere, part of what is changing is that it appears this predictability is out of the window: Things like NASA employees stopped or how a few days ago a former Norwegian Prime Minister travelling on a diplomatic passport was stopped. And so. In a way, I suppose, I get to finally experience the uncertainty people from less favoured countries and/or darker skinned/with a muslim sounding name have dealt with for much longer. That is perhaps the only benefit of this mess: It's finally affecting groups of people that may cause it to become politically untenable over time.
- civilian 10y ago
  We've been searching phones at the US border long before Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/11/30/u-s-border-agents-stopped-journalist-from-entry-and-took-his-phones/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/11/30... You are right to be outraged, but you are wrong to be fearful of Trump. You need to be fearful and angry at the government, regardless of who's the President.
ephemeral9235 10y ago
How about a lockdown feature that sends the unlock code to a trusted 3rd party? For corporate phones that should work quite nicely, especially if unlocking would require physical connection to the trusted network. That way you could simply put it into lockdown mode before you enter border checks and not use the phone except for minimal calling features.
- Spooky23 10y ago
  Nah you just whack it. Most MDMs can wipe the phone or data on it in the event you leave the country.
foolrush 10y ago
Wouldn't it make more sense to stop the “Wait and see” approach and organize action against the problem? It strikes me that yielding to unjust approaches is fundamentally problematic on two fronts: - The action of forcing legal citizens to unlock their personal information certainly is questionable constitutionally. - The idea that one can perform these sorts of workarounds is likely biased with privilege.
XorNot 10y ago
This is actually what I'll be doing when I visit Hawaii later this year. Same with my laptop. Visiting the US now demands exactly the same measures as visiting China.

pjc50 10y ago

> So how do you protect yourself? Individually? It's extremely difficult other than "try not to appear suspicious" and bring a dumbphone when crossing borders. The real protection is collective. Stopping the current administration is only the beginning; the Democrats are merely "not as bad" on this kind of issue. Broader anti-racism and anti-racist-media action is needed, because otherwise this kind of arbitary brutal border policy will win votes.

aaron-lebo 10y ago
Broader anti-racism and anti-racist-media action is needed, because otherwise this kind of arbitrary brutal border policy will win votes. This is an issue much bigger than race and as soon as we stop compartmentalizing it into that it will be better for us all. You turn it into another about race thing and people will tune out. You make people realize they are at risk no matter who they are and they might pay attention. That might sound tone deaf but the reality is people first and foremost care about themselves and their in-group before anything else. It's hard not to.
- JamilD 10y ago
  I don't know why you were downvoted; while it's true that racial minorities are targeted more often than most, many don't empathize with that. They only care once their own rights are threatened. By making it clear that these issues harm everyone, we can prevent these actions from happening to anyone. People are willing to take away the rights of others, but generally are not willing to sacrifice their own.
- tn13 10y ago
  Not sure why you are down-voted but this is true. Most of the anti-liberty policies come in disguise of we v/s bad guy arguments. The bad guys are often minorities.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    > The bad guys are often minorities. I've observed this pattern: 'bad guy' is part of another group? That whole group is bad. 'bad guy' is part of the group of the person speaking: That's just an individual rotten apple, but it does not say anything about all of us.

EGreg 10y ago

Deniability. Have many accounts, some of which have a subsetof your email which is totally safe. They can even be mirrors. Or alternatively, have all your sensitive communication on other channels which leave no trace (in browser history, for instance). Simple! PS: It would be cool if apps let you have steganography... like Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp wouldn't show ALL conversations until you entered a specific password. They could even have groups of hidden conversations. Even if cops know that, they will never be sure if you revealed everything. This may be good or bad for you.

usefulcat 10y ago
That presupposes that you can accurately determine exactly what qualifies as "safe" in advance.
- EGreg 10y ago
  Better than nothing - which is what these apps offer now in terms of incognito sessions.

ephemeral9235 10y ago

See this -^ ? It's a new pseudonymous account. Unless your social network has some kind of insane policy where they only allow you to have a single identity you can use that kind of feature to compartmentalize your activities. Combine that with a phone that lets you have multiple users where you use one for banal activity which you can then show to Big Brother when he comes knocking. And others for anything important. To me having several pseudonyms and also using throwaways is part of standard information hygiene. I also have multiple email addresses, some are set to forward to others (one-way of course), others aren't. I don't know why people aren't teaching that to their children. I also love 4chan for that reason. I can talk to people in a totally ephemeral manner. Identity only exists for the duration of a conversation. Or I don't know, do people also share their grindr adventures by linking that account to twitter these days?

aaron-lebo 10y ago
That falls apart with the simplest IP tracking. The government has all that data anyway, I see no reason they couldn't run a "background check" and figure out exactly who you are and what you've done. It's a false sense of security, is it not? It's probably best to assume your opponent isn't completely dumb.
- ephemeral9235 10y ago
  That depends on what your threat model is. I assume we're talking about random police or border searches of your phone. Not the NSA or some surveillance apparatus which can make warrantless inquiries to your ISP and social network providers at a moments notice. If we're facing a surveillance state without any internal obstructions then yes, far stricter opsec will be needed.
  - aaron-lebo 10y ago
    You're right of course. I guess I'm wondering if border guards at any point in the future will have quick access to a database, presumably with information from a company that has either voluntarily or been forced to provide data. Sir, we just ran your social networking accounts and according to our data you have another Facebook account that you did not provide access to...

RealGeek 10y ago

How about if we reset and delete everything from the phone before crossing any international borders?

izacus 10y ago
That would mark you as suspicious (Who doesn't have anything on their phone?) and give you a person of interest treatment.
iak8god 10y ago
That would work except that it's super inconvenient.
ptero 10y ago
That's how some employers (mine included) already handle work-owned electronic devices: going overseas -- either leave yours behind or pick up a loaner that will be fully wiped on arrival.
- wheelerwj 10y ago
  people used to look at me like i was crazy because id always wipe my laptop and devices before crossing the border. but its the only way now.
ProblemFactory 10y ago
That looks suspicious. Unless you are coming home to your own country, looking suspicious is a good way to get denied entry.
- prodigal_erik 10y ago
  Maybe employers' security teams should make it known that they routinely instruct employees to do this for business or personal travel.

pveierland 10y ago

> So how do you protect yourself? I don't believe any of the technical solutions mentioned in this thread; using a dumb phone, multiple identities and/or false data for plausible deniability, wiping the phone before passing the border, is viable for a larger number of people. They also fail once a border agent insists on accessing an email account for which they know you have the password. The only protection is through protecting people legally. Once the border agencies can insist on accessing your email and cloud storage before letting you enter the country it seems like any arbitrary thought crime can deny you access.

psybin 10y ago
Lying to, or misleading a border agent is a felony in the US.
- wheelerwj 10y ago
  lying to ANY federal agent is illegal.
cylinder 10y ago
Just don't give them any passwords or unlock anything if you are a US citizen. Let them try to detain a US citizen indefinitely for it.
- M_Grey 10y ago
  I wouldn't want to be that test case for the Trump administration.
- wfunction 10y ago
  Wasn't this guy a US citizen and didn't he still feel too scared to do this?
  - morgante 10y ago
    Yes, which makes this especially abhorrent. The government insists the searches are only of "visitors." Nobody has an obligation to refuse to comply (and be detained and/or jailed) but if put in this situation I would refuse. I'm not willingly giving up my rights without a court compelling me.

coldcode 10y ago

The result of stories like this will be to chill visiting from other countries (destroying tourism in the country) and likely result in the same treatment by other countries to American citizens. I can't understand why the people who decide these policies think they are harmless.

basseq 10y ago
Stories like this have been in the news for many years. Here's one from 2014: http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/supreme-court-phone-warrant-us-border/ http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/supreme-court-phone-warrant-u... And an EFF post from 2011: https://www.eff.org/wp/defending-privacy-us-border-guide-travelers-carrying-digital-devices https://www.eff.org/wp/defending-privacy-us-border-guide-tra... It's also not just the US; here's one from Canada: https://www.cnet.com/news/man-charged-for-refusing-to-give-up-phone-passcode-to-canadian-border-agents/ https://www.cnet.com/news/man-charged-for-refusing-to-give-u... Finally, it's not a policy; the the general differences in due process at the border, as upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court (1997, Ramsey v. United States).

mirimir 10y ago

> So how do you protect yourself? Have all expected social media, with expected contacts (family, friends, colleagues, etc) and activity. But carry disposable stuff, because you can't trust it after it's been taken for inspection. If asked, just say they you're worried about theft ;) Or if you're on business, that it's your employer's policy. Which it should be. For anything that you want kept private, be very careful to compartmentalize it from your meatspace identity.

Syzygies 10y ago

> So how do you protect yourself? We need a "kill code" on secured devices: A separate password that silently resets the device to a saved state suggesting mild use and offering nothing of substance. Alarm systems have these: A code you only enter under duress, that looks like a regular disarm code, but silently summons help. So where are Apple and Google on something similar for our digital privacy?

BoppreH 10y ago
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's destruction of evidence.
- biafra 10y ago
  Only if you're accused of a crime, right? Which is not the case here. They just want to search your data. Although if you're not a citizen they will probably not let you enter the country.
  - smsm42 10y ago
    > Only if you're accused of a crime, right? Not really. As soon as you know there's an investigation against you, any action to purposely destroy relevant evidence can be used against you, even if there was no formal crime charge yet. For companies, they usually get special letter that instructs them to preserve evidence due to investigation ongoing or lawsuit pending. It is also common in civil cases, where there's no crime to talk about at all. But on a personal level CBP agent saying "we need information on your phone" can be treated as informing you about necessity to preserve evidence, and they may as well just give you a printed instruction saying you have to preserve it. Once they did that, purposely destroying evidence (which is anything they could consider relevant) is a crime. Unfortunately, you are not likely to get off on technicality with this - they know the technicalities much better than you. The whole policy of border being "rights-free zone" needs change, not finding a loophole.
    - biafra 10y ago

draugadrotten 10y ago

> So how do you protect yourself? It is time for all cloud services to provide plausible deniability by allowing for multiple passwords to access the same social account - but where all the passwords except the One allows for only a subset of the account. E.g. logon to Facebook using password 'plausible1' and see only friend 1 and friend 2. Logon to facebook using password 'everything' and see friend 1 and 2 but friend 3 as well.

psybin 10y ago
Are you using a system to hide information from us? Answer in the negative and you just committed a felony.

Sir_Substance 10y ago

>So how do you protect yourself? Here, now, today? Set all your accounts up with auto-generated passwords, and store the whole lot in a password vault[1]. Don't bring the password vault file with you when you cross the border. Arrange to acquire it after you have entered the country[2]. Now you can honestly say you don't know any of your passwords. If enough people do this, then this law will be pointless. Also, for the love of god stop bringing your smartphone with you when you travel. Get a $15 quad-band feature phone, and just bring a paper map with you. If you don't need your laptop then leave that behind as well. [1] As much as I hate password managers and see them as a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist, you should probably be doing this by now anyway. [2] The details of this can range from a pre-timed email to a physical handover from someone inside the country, depending on whether you think the border police might detain you and attempt to force you to acquire the password vault.

DrScump 10y ago
Also, for the love of god stop bringing your smartphone with you when you travel. Is there a risk of bringing a smartphone with no past context on it (e.g. a previously-unused refurb or new phone)? Even one that has been factory reset would give basic prying eyes nothing to find, barring the use of forensic tools.
- Kostchei 10y ago
  factory reset will do the job even for forensic tools- the border-class forensic tools- cellebrite, magnet forensics aquire, oxygen, etc are all accessing above the flash translation layer. So deleted is deleted, in that case, on a phone. And chip off is Mossad level expertise, due to chip size/complexity, wear-leveling and said flash translation.
- Sir_Substance 10y ago
  >Is there a risk of bringing a smartphone with no past context on it (e.g. a previously-unused refurb or new phone)? If you're willing to have two smartphones, or to backup and wipe your smartphone when you travel (don't forget the sim), then I guess not that much. I definitely couldn't be bothered though, hence the cheapie phone. Your mileage may vary if you're going for a 3 months sojourn I guess, I usually do 2-3 day trips. However, back on the sliding scale of paranoia, the main risk of bringing your phone with you if you want next level protection from the US is that if they ever take your phone and remove it from your field if view, you might want to bin it. The US has proven very adept at modifying circuitry of devices to monitor them[1]. A cheap feature phone can be binned without thought. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa...

morgante 10y ago

I'll protect myself by refusing. They can detain me for as long as they want. I'll fight it in court, because I am a US citizen and god dammit they do not have the right to warrantlessly review my encrypted communications. If we've gone so far on the path towards authoritarianism that even citizens don't have rights, I'll just never come back in.

koolba 10y ago
> I'll protect myself by refusing. They can detain me for as long as they want. I'll fight it in court, because I am a US citizen and god dammit they do not have the right to warrantlessly review my encrypted communications. While I don't agree it's a good thing, I think they do have the right to detain you indefinitely and/or search whatever they damn well please if it's on your person. I don't think asking for a password that doesn't unlock a device in your possession would pass muster, but unlocking your phone would. Your rights (as a citizen) at the border aren't the same as when you're not there. Also, I think the definition of "at the border" includes anywhere with 100 miles of the physical end of jurisdiction (so effectively you sitting at home in most of the west or east coasts is "at the border"). > If we've gone so far on the path towards authoritarianism that even citizens don't have rights, I'll just never come back in. FYI, I think they have the same right to search you or hold you indefinitely on the way out as well.
- morgante 10y ago
  > I don't think asking for a password that doesn't unlock a device in your possession would pass muster, but unlocking your phone would. I don't think they can force me to give up my PIN. Not even a court can do that. My rights as a citizen are indeed less, in that they can detain me in an attempt to force compliance. The thing is that it's never been fully tested. In all the cases I've reviewed, either the person relented or CBP eventually let them through. If the detention lasted for days, their case would become harder and harder to make. Someone needs to make a stand. > FYI, I think they have the same right to search you or hold you indefinitely on the way out as well. Perhaps, but leaving is nowhere near as systematic. More importantly: if they were making giving up this info a condition of entry, I would refuse to enter. If they want to lock me up for that, I have a court case.

k-mcgrady 10y ago

>> Their point about how other countries will take the US's stance as a cue is somewhat scary. I don't see this happening, in Europe at least. It seems like a clear violation of the right to freedom of expression and right to family and private life so shouldn't be possible for any of the 47 members of the Council of Europe (who are bound by the ECHR).

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

skriticos2 10y ago

Within Europe (ps: as a European citizen) you can go anywhere with a personal identification card (no passport) and there are no border controls (when walking or driving). There isn't even a border, just a sign: welcome to $country (ps: and maybe local driving instructions). Say what you will about the EU, but this has been a great achievement. I can go through airport security between two EU countries and security will just scan my ID and take a picture in an automated booth and I'm good to go (did exactly that several times). It's like 30 seconds to pass the security gate when entering and no personal interaction. I'm really having difficulty to understand how the United States got from the cradle of freedom (let's say after the civil war, the colonization was not so prestigious) to the capricious and homophobic entity that it is shaping up to be.

smsm42 10y ago
Within the states of US you can do the same ;) EU essentially wants to be United States of Europe. Though I'm not sure all EU states yet ready to surrender as much national sovereignty as US states did. And what anything of this has to do with homophobia?
- popey456963 10y ago
  Donald Trump is undoubtedly homophobic, I think he's just pointing out that for the country to be voting for him, to an extent a proportion of them must agree. And I disagree about you saying the EU just wishes to become the United States of Europe. In almost no sense does anyone give up their "sovereignty" by joining the EU. Every country still creates it's own laws, governs how it wishes to and has full control over what happens to itself. The EU only allows free travel and trade between each of the countries within it and also a standard currency and standard regulations (to enable the free travel and trade to happen in a safe environment).
  - aaron-lebo 10y ago
    Damnit...I hate to look like I'm defending Trump, but he was also the only Republican to let an open homosexual speak on the convention stage (Thiel). He's self-serving and contradictory (see Pence), but it's not nearly as open and shut as suggested. Do you have any specific reasons he's homophobic?

incompatible 10y ago

I'd suggest not even taking a phone if you are visiting the US. You can presumably buy a prepaid phone there if you need one during the trip, and connect it to your existing online accounts.

incompatible 10y ago
I guess you could also do a factory reset on an existing phone and set it up once you are through immigration.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

pm90 10y ago

Lying to a border agent can automatically be taken as grounds for refusing entry.

baki 10y ago

yes, yes, but you are not a NASA scientist so don't worry

baki 10y ago

yes, yes, but you are not a NASA scientist so don't worry

bigbugbag 10y ago

Social media is a made word and concept to talk about online services designed to capture and collect and exploit private personal data that the users willingly give them, the "if you're not paying for it, then you're the product being sold". so email does not fall into this IMHO. Not having social media account is the obvious answer, there is little that this will be implemented ever but having a multiple password account could be a workaround. a master password give access to all while another you could give to border guard would transparently limit the access to a sanitized version of the account. The other obvious answer to force the government and lawmakers to remove this policy.