3 ms·
I don't see anything travelers won back. The letter is saying CBP policy doesn't allow these things, when obviously agents have been doing them. It may be aga
by sbov 9y ago
I don't see anything travelers won back. The letter is saying CBP policy doesn't allow these things, when obviously agents have been doing them. It may be against policy, but unless you reprimand or fire people over it your policy is useless.
The letter is just ass covering and the title is terribly misleading.
- 4bpp 9y agoThis seems to be a general issue with any sort of attempt to impose restrictions on police-like agencies these days - between the boundlessly sympathetic legal system, the political power of police unions and an institutional culture that distributes responsibility between superiors and "boots on the ground" in a maximally deniable way, in practice the only way to get them to abide by a rule is to get them to believe themselves that to do so is for the better.
- riffic 9y agoThis is exactly why I donate to the EFF. I urge anyone else to do so as well: https://www.eff.org/helpout https://www.eff.org/helpout
- ganoushoreilly 9y agoIt also doesn't address that many of those apps have local caches of data that would fall under the rules.