6 ms·

Answer no, and it's just as valid as if you had a hand-written notebook full of work-related records that you left in your office back home before traveling. Th

Answer no, and it's just as valid as if you had a hand-written notebook full of work-related records that you left in your office back home before traveling. There aren't any reasonable justifications for requiring you to bring all information you physically have access to you with you when traveling, regardless of the format it's stored in. Not bringing something with you is inherently different from hiding it.

tankenmate 9y ago
Lying to a federal employee is a felony; if you know you are answering untruthfully and the USG can prove it then you are probably going to prison.
- peeters 9y ago
  What lie has been told?
  - vorticalbox 9y ago
    From what I understand, it removes everything but ones marked as safe therefore you're not hiding anything. It's like moving your private files from a device before travelling, you're not hiding anything you just didn't bring it.
    - peeters 9y ago
      That's how I understand it. It is the physical presence of data that allows the warrantless search in the first place. Leaving data off of your device would be treated no different than leaving your device at home entirely.
    - zwily 9y ago
      So how does the whole "show us Facebook" thing work then? They're interested in your Facebook bits stored on the internet, not the bits on your device.
      - skewart 9y ago
        Right. And there is absolutely no legal justification for requesting you go fetch those bits from a data center hundreds of miles away and show them to the CBP employee. However, they are hoping that people don't know that and do it anyway, even though they don't have to. Also, a lot of CBP employees probably don't understand that distinction anyway. It feels like it's all "on the phone". Of course that distinction between data in your possession on your device and data that's hundreds or thousands of miles away might not matter if enough precedent accumulates to support forcing people to go fetch things when they're at the border. So we need to stand up for freedom from government intrusion now!
        BearGoesChirp 9y ago
        >And there is absolutely no legal justification for requesting you go fetch those bits from a data center hundreds of miles away and show them to the CBP employee. Except they are allowed to deny your entry if you don't satisfy their whims.
- djsumdog 9y ago
  I think we need a lawyer here, but this seems totally wrong. You're only committing a crime if you lie under oath, either to a court or congress. Cops lie to people all the time. You should use your right to be silent rather than answer any questions of course, but that right disappears at the border. Still, lying to a customs agent isn't a felony (at least not in the US). (If so, please cite the law). If you're not a citizen of the country you are entering, the most they can do is refuse entry. If you are a citizen, well there is where it can get complicated.
  - dreamcompiler 9y ago
    Very much not true. Counter to the way we think America should work perhaps, but many people have gone to prison for lying to federal officials while not under oath. Martha Stewart being one of the most famous. Your best strategy when confronted with uncomfortable questions by federal officials in the US is to say "I wish to consult with my attorney before answering any questions." The result might be a lot of unpleasantness and delay, but they cannot throw you in prison for saying those words.
  - biehl 9y ago
    I think you are thinking of "Perjury" - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perjury https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perjury Other forms of lying can also be illegal, however.
  - LyndsySimon 9y ago
    Here's information on the law you seek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
  - peeters 9y ago
    > You're only committing a crime if you lie under oath, either to a court or congress. This is unfortunately far from the truth. See this recent post: http://www.wisenberglaw.com/Articles/How-to-Avoid-Going-to-Jail-under-18-U-S-C-Section-1001-for-Lying-to-Government-Agents.shtml http://www.wisenberglaw.com/Articles/How-to-Avoid-Going-to-J...
- pwdisswordfish 9y ago
  I don't think lie detection using ultrasonography is very reliable...
giobox 9y ago
> There aren't any reasonable justifications for requiring you to bring all information you physically have access to you with you when traveling... regardless of the format it's stored in. I think many of us would equally argue there isn't any 'reasonable justification' for forcing phone unlocks on random strangers in airports, but that still happens. I think you are asking for a reasoned distinction from people incapable of drawing them, and that while what you say makes sense, we are not dealing with a sensible system. I can absolutely envisage some asshole airport security staff member causing grief over these kind of features should they grow in popularity - the existing interactions over phone unlocks are already in a weird constitution-free legal grey area in the US, even for US citizens. For foreigners the situation is worse still - basically zero options but compliance, or feel free to go home and never be granted entry ever again.
- tempestn 9y ago
  Exactly. People are already forced to log into social media accounts and such. So it appears anything you're able to access online is considered fair game.
IanCal 9y ago
> Not bringing something with you is inherently different from hiding it. But you don't have access to your notebook once in the country. The 1Password travel mode is not for while you're in the country, but specifically just for the border crossing.
- drrotmos 9y ago
  Travel mode, especially on a Team plan though, is essentially asking one of your co-workers to scan and e-mail the notebook to you after having crossed the border.
apetresc 9y ago
It's not really the same thing at all. Something you leave in your office is something you won't have access to at your destination - so it's logical that it wouldn't be subject to customs. Something online, regardless of physical storage location, is something you will have access to at your destination, so it should be subject to customs.
- SamBam 9y ago
  So if you travel without your phone, they still have the right to demand access to your email account? How does that make any sense?
  - apetresc 9y ago
    I don't know whether or not they have the right - do they have the right to read some sealed-up documents in your briefcase? Whatever your answer to that question is, it should probably be the same answer to the e-mail question. All these trick arguments about "oh but the e-mail's not actually on my phone, it's in the cloud!" don't hold water for me; it's information you're bringing into the country. Either it's subject to search or it isn't.
    - SamBam 9y ago
      But how are you "bringing your email into the country" any more than you would be if you just sent an email? If they can't access my sent email when I send it from abroad without a warrant, then how does me entering the country without a phone or computer allow them access to my email?

tankenmate 9y ago

Lying to a federal employee is a felony; if you know you are answering untruthfully and the USG can prove it then you are probably going to prison.

peeters 9y ago
What lie has been told?
- vorticalbox 9y ago
  From what I understand, it removes everything but ones marked as safe therefore you're not hiding anything. It's like moving your private files from a device before travelling, you're not hiding anything you just didn't bring it.
  - peeters 9y ago
    That's how I understand it. It is the physical presence of data that allows the warrantless search in the first place. Leaving data off of your device would be treated no different than leaving your device at home entirely.
  - zwily 9y ago
    So how does the whole "show us Facebook" thing work then? They're interested in your Facebook bits stored on the internet, not the bits on your device.
    - skewart 9y ago
      Right. And there is absolutely no legal justification for requesting you go fetch those bits from a data center hundreds of miles away and show them to the CBP employee. However, they are hoping that people don't know that and do it anyway, even though they don't have to. Also, a lot of CBP employees probably don't understand that distinction anyway. It feels like it's all "on the phone". Of course that distinction between data in your possession on your device and data that's hundreds or thousands of miles away might not matter if enough precedent accumulates to support forcing people to go fetch things when they're at the border. So we need to stand up for freedom from government intrusion now!
      - BearGoesChirp 9y ago
        >And there is absolutely no legal justification for requesting you go fetch those bits from a data center hundreds of miles away and show them to the CBP employee. Except they are allowed to deny your entry if you don't satisfy their whims.
djsumdog 9y ago
I think we need a lawyer here, but this seems totally wrong. You're only committing a crime if you lie under oath, either to a court or congress. Cops lie to people all the time. You should use your right to be silent rather than answer any questions of course, but that right disappears at the border. Still, lying to a customs agent isn't a felony (at least not in the US). (If so, please cite the law). If you're not a citizen of the country you are entering, the most they can do is refuse entry. If you are a citizen, well there is where it can get complicated.
- dreamcompiler 9y ago
  Very much not true. Counter to the way we think America should work perhaps, but many people have gone to prison for lying to federal officials while not under oath. Martha Stewart being one of the most famous. Your best strategy when confronted with uncomfortable questions by federal officials in the US is to say "I wish to consult with my attorney before answering any questions." The result might be a lot of unpleasantness and delay, but they cannot throw you in prison for saying those words.
- biehl 9y ago
  I think you are thinking of "Perjury" - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perjury https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perjury Other forms of lying can also be illegal, however.
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  Here's information on the law you seek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_false_statements See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
- peeters 9y ago
  > You're only committing a crime if you lie under oath, either to a court or congress. This is unfortunately far from the truth. See this recent post: http://www.wisenberglaw.com/Articles/How-to-Avoid-Going-to-Jail-under-18-U-S-C-Section-1001-for-Lying-to-Government-Agents.shtml http://www.wisenberglaw.com/Articles/How-to-Avoid-Going-to-J...
pwdisswordfish 9y ago
I don't think lie detection using ultrasonography is very reliable...

giobox 9y ago

> There aren't any reasonable justifications for requiring you to bring all information you physically have access to you with you when traveling... regardless of the format it's stored in. I think many of us would equally argue there isn't any 'reasonable justification' for forcing phone unlocks on random strangers in airports, but that still happens. I think you are asking for a reasoned distinction from people incapable of drawing them, and that while what you say makes sense, we are not dealing with a sensible system. I can absolutely envisage some asshole airport security staff member causing grief over these kind of features should they grow in popularity - the existing interactions over phone unlocks are already in a weird constitution-free legal grey area in the US, even for US citizens. For foreigners the situation is worse still - basically zero options but compliance, or feel free to go home and never be granted entry ever again.

tempestn 9y ago
Exactly. People are already forced to log into social media accounts and such. So it appears anything you're able to access online is considered fair game.

IanCal 9y ago

> Not bringing something with you is inherently different from hiding it. But you don't have access to your notebook once in the country. The 1Password travel mode is not for while you're in the country, but specifically just for the border crossing.

drrotmos 9y ago
Travel mode, especially on a Team plan though, is essentially asking one of your co-workers to scan and e-mail the notebook to you after having crossed the border.

apetresc 9y ago

It's not really the same thing at all. Something you leave in your office is something you won't have access to at your destination - so it's logical that it wouldn't be subject to customs. Something online, regardless of physical storage location, is something you will have access to at your destination, so it should be subject to customs.

SamBam 9y ago
So if you travel without your phone, they still have the right to demand access to your email account? How does that make any sense?
- apetresc 9y ago
  I don't know whether or not they have the right - do they have the right to read some sealed-up documents in your briefcase? Whatever your answer to that question is, it should probably be the same answer to the e-mail question. All these trick arguments about "oh but the e-mail's not actually on my phone, it's in the cloud!" don't hold water for me; it's information you're bringing into the country. Either it's subject to search or it isn't.
  - SamBam 9y ago
    But how are you "bringing your email into the country" any more than you would be if you just sent an email? If they can't access my sent email when I send it from abroad without a warrant, then how does me entering the country without a phone or computer allow them access to my email?