8 ms·

This qualifies already. 18 U.S. Code § 1519 defines it as "Whoever knowingly...conceals...with the intent to impede...the proper administration of any matter w

This qualifies already. 18 U.S. Code § 1519 defines it as "Whoever knowingly...conceals...with the intent to impede...the proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States" So technically, entering travel mode for the purpose of hiding your stuff from border agents could be interpreted as a violation of that statute, regardless of whether there was an active investigation or legal proceeding. Of course, it would trigger a massive backlash if a federal prosecutor went after people for this. But it's there...

jwr 9y ago
I think there is a line to be drawn somewhere, and I don't know where — but taking this further, if I erase my laptop before going to the US and then restore it from a backup online, isn't this the same thing as „knowingly concealing with the intent to impede”? And what if I don't take the laptop at all? Am I „concealing” anything? Theoretically — yes. There has to be a limit to how far one can take the application of that law.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  If you aren't aware of a matter concerning your data you can't intend to impede that matter by choosing not to transport your data on your person.
eridius 9y ago
Entering travel mode is literally deleting the data off your computer. It's not concealing anything. I think a federal prosecutor would have a hell of a time arguing that people aren't allowed to erase data from their computer before traveling.
- Analemma_ 9y ago
  In the law, intent matters. You're deleting the data with the intent to hide it from border agents. A federal prosecutor absolutely could argue that, if they wished.
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    I'd be entering travel mode with the intent of removing the ability to access the data from the device. I would be surprised if travel mode deleted my data.
  - eridius 9y ago
    You're deleting the data because you don't want to travel with that data. You're not hiding it. You literally just don't want to have access to it while you're traveling. In that sense it's no different than, say, leaving a hard drive with all your data behind (plugged into an internet-enabled computer that you can SSH in to and transfer your files back to yourself after you've crossed the border).
    - Analemma_ 9y ago
      Read rosser's comment above. If push came to shove, your clever wordplay would amount to getting into a rules-lawyering contest with Federal prosecutors, and I promise you that is a contest you would lose.
      - eridius 9y ago
        I don't think it's rules lawyering to say that literally not having the data is different than hiding it. There's nothing illegal about choosing to not bring stuff with you when you travel. And as long as the CBP's authority is limited to searching your devices and not forcing you to log into websites, then simply not carrying the data on your device seems perfectly reasonable. Furthermore, I don't think there's anything productive at all about making the argument that federal prosecutors will get you no matter what you do. That's just shutting down the discussion entirely.
        Analemma_ 9y ago
        > Furthermore, I don't think there's anything productive at all about making the argument that federal prosecutors will get you no matter what you do. That's just shutting down the discussion entirely. Well, it is true that if the government wants to come after you- as in, you specifically- then it is basically true that they will get you no matter what you do. But that's not the point I was making in my previous posts, so let's drop it. The point I was trying to make was that this 1Password feature will not help you, legally, if CBP realizes you're using it and they want to make a fuss. Maybe if you rolled your own PW manager and decided not to sync the incriminating data, you'd have a case. But this feature is literally advertised as "protect your data from unwarranted searches [clearly implying, searches by the government] when you travel". The technical implementation (your "deleting" vs. "not having" distinction) does not matter: the intent is clear.
ben_jones 9y ago
There would be no backlash unless the person was well-known, all they would have to do is show an unflattering picture of the victim and accuse them of 'possessing hacking tools' and 'hiding information from law enforcement.' Both would be true, the latter being actually true and the former applying to anyone using a terminal with black background and green text.
IcyPickle 9y ago
The "matter within the jurisdiction" of border control is to inspect anything being brought across the border. You're not impeding that. You're simply not bringing something across the border. This is different from e.g. hiding drugs in your suitcase (or even data on a device): there you're impeding their ability to inspect those drugs.

jwr 9y ago

I think there is a line to be drawn somewhere, and I don't know where — but taking this further, if I erase my laptop before going to the US and then restore it from a backup online, isn't this the same thing as „knowingly concealing with the intent to impede”? And what if I don't take the laptop at all? Am I „concealing” anything? Theoretically — yes. There has to be a limit to how far one can take the application of that law.

maxerickson 9y ago
If you aren't aware of a matter concerning your data you can't intend to impede that matter by choosing not to transport your data on your person.

eridius 9y ago

Entering travel mode is literally deleting the data off your computer. It's not concealing anything. I think a federal prosecutor would have a hell of a time arguing that people aren't allowed to erase data from their computer before traveling.

Analemma_ 9y ago
In the law, intent matters. You're deleting the data with the intent to hide it from border agents. A federal prosecutor absolutely could argue that, if they wished.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  I'd be entering travel mode with the intent of removing the ability to access the data from the device. I would be surprised if travel mode deleted my data.
- eridius 9y ago
  You're deleting the data because you don't want to travel with that data. You're not hiding it. You literally just don't want to have access to it while you're traveling. In that sense it's no different than, say, leaving a hard drive with all your data behind (plugged into an internet-enabled computer that you can SSH in to and transfer your files back to yourself after you've crossed the border).
  - Analemma_ 9y ago
    Read rosser's comment above. If push came to shove, your clever wordplay would amount to getting into a rules-lawyering contest with Federal prosecutors, and I promise you that is a contest you would lose.
    - eridius 9y ago
      I don't think it's rules lawyering to say that literally not having the data is different than hiding it. There's nothing illegal about choosing to not bring stuff with you when you travel. And as long as the CBP's authority is limited to searching your devices and not forcing you to log into websites, then simply not carrying the data on your device seems perfectly reasonable. Furthermore, I don't think there's anything productive at all about making the argument that federal prosecutors will get you no matter what you do. That's just shutting down the discussion entirely.
      - Analemma_ 9y ago
        > Furthermore, I don't think there's anything productive at all about making the argument that federal prosecutors will get you no matter what you do. That's just shutting down the discussion entirely. Well, it is true that if the government wants to come after you- as in, you specifically- then it is basically true that they will get you no matter what you do. But that's not the point I was making in my previous posts, so let's drop it. The point I was trying to make was that this 1Password feature will not help you, legally, if CBP realizes you're using it and they want to make a fuss. Maybe if you rolled your own PW manager and decided not to sync the incriminating data, you'd have a case. But this feature is literally advertised as "protect your data from unwarranted searches [clearly implying, searches by the government] when you travel". The technical implementation (your "deleting" vs. "not having" distinction) does not matter: the intent is clear.

ben_jones 9y ago

There would be no backlash unless the person was well-known, all they would have to do is show an unflattering picture of the victim and accuse them of 'possessing hacking tools' and 'hiding information from law enforcement.' Both would be true, the latter being actually true and the former applying to anyone using a terminal with black background and green text.

IcyPickle 9y ago

The "matter within the jurisdiction" of border control is to inspect anything being brought across the border. You're not impeding that. You're simply not bringing something across the border. This is different from e.g. hiding drugs in your suitcase (or even data on a device): there you're impeding their ability to inspect those drugs.