3 ms·
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 st
by 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.
- vageli 9y ago> 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. We are hinging on the subtle difference between deletion and non action. If I choose not to bring my phone with me to the border, and an agent remarks on the suspiciousness of that fact, if I were to reply, "I didn't bring it because I didn't want to travel with it," did you commit a crime? Even if you were arrested for that statement, dor a prosecutor to convince a jury that you didn't bring data with you because you didn't want it to be inspected at the border vs you didn't bring it because you didn't want it to get stolen/whatever does not seem likely, but that is just my opinion.
- Analemma_ 9y ago> If I choose not to bring my phone with me to the border, and an agent remarks on the suspiciousness of that fact, if I were to reply, "I didn't bring it because I didn't want to travel with it," did you commit a crime? Probably not. > We are hinging on the subtle difference between deletion and non action. I agree, and my argument is that "activating Travel Mode" is clearly the former, regardless of its technical implementation, because it requires positive action.
- eridius 9y agoI don't see why the distinction matters. Deleting data because you don't want to travel with it should be no different than leaving your phone at home because you don't want to travel with it.
- IcyPickle 9y agoI think I would feel reasonably comfortable telling a border agent that I didn't bring a phone / specific data because I felt uncomfortable about the idea of having it searched at the border. There's certainly nothing wrong with that, and I doubt it would get you denied entry (unless they pulled you out for a non-routine reason anyway). You're certainly not required to bring anything across a border.