12 ms·
DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border
- PavlovsCat 14y agoWhat's a watchdog? A lap dog you can wear like a watch? I suggest to call it "watch dog" then, just so it doesn't get confused with http://www.google.com/search?q=watchdog&tbm=isch http://www.google.com/search?q=watchdog&tbm=isch
- Dylan16807 14y agoAre you making some kind of joke I don't understand? Also the image results it's giving me are all dogs that keep watch.
- PavlovsCat 14y agoJust trying to say that some watchdogs do seem to behave more like a lap dog, including this one. Making up "watch dog" as opposed to "watchdog" is only funny to me I guess, you have to conjure mental images of little people in suits being worn and flaunted like watches by slightly bigger people in suits for this to work :P If you squint just right it's hilarious, because it's accurate.
- to3m 14y ago"watchdog" is slangy terminology for a consumer rights organization or an industry regulator. It's, like, a metaphor, man. I don't know about the US but the term is commonly used in the UK. (I suppose "watch dog" would be a dog that watches, or something that watches dogs, or, as you suggest, a dog that's somehow got something to do with wrist-mounted timepieces.)
- yareally 14y agoIt's used in the US as well (quite a bit in the media for the purpose you defined) so not sure what the OP is getting at really.
- mtgx 14y agoDidn't DHS also declare that 100 mile range from the border is basically Constitution-free? This is mighty convenient, as they can now search everyone like this within that 100 mile range.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- mhurron 14y agoThat 100 mile range is from any boarder and coastline and covers most of the US population. http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/fact-sheet-us-constitution-free-zone http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/fact-sheet-us-con... http://www.aclu.org/constitution-free-zone-map http://www.aclu.org/constitution-free-zone-map
- drivebyacct2 14y agoWow. I thought I did a decent job of keeping up on the USFG's encroachment on civil liberties but I missed this particular blend of lunacy. Thanks for the links.
- nthj 14y ago[citation needed], as the Slashdot discussion [1] had conflicting reports. [1] http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/02/09/0054212/dhs-can-seize-your-electronics-within-100-miof-us-border-says-dhs http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/02/09/0054212/dhs-can-seize...
- dholowiski 14y agoI'm a Canadian and I was pulled over and questioned at a dhs check stop a few years ago, within this 100 mile zone. It all went fine, but the did ask what I was up to when I went through the same check the next day. (I was sightseeing).
- tptacek 14y agoDHS can say whatever it wants, but SCOTUS says that the search has to actually take place at the border. See for instance Almeida-Sanchez v. US. "Constitution free" is obviously hyperbolic.
- betterunix 14y agoSo, remember a few months ago, when people like me were saying that the third parties are the only hope in America's democracy? Then a bunch of people said that Obama was worlds different from Romney, and that comparing Obama to Bush was lunacy. I have to wonder what happens when those Obama supporters with left-wing sentiments read an article like this.
- Evbn 14y agoF is better than F-
- jlgreco 14y agoIs it really? The result is the same, either way you fail, the only difference is how you feel about yourself afterwards.
- mhurron 14y agoIf D and R are interchangeable what makes you think a third party would be any different?
- martinced 14y agoI'm not american but Ron Paul had his own libertarian party back in the days and he was "R" only because he had to chose a camp. Ron Paul made it pretty clear during nearly its entire life that he was for less state and more individual liberties. That makes me think that things would have been way different should he have been elected president.
- wnight 14y agoNeither are interchangeable, they're just equally bad for global citizens who want to make a better world. The problem with two parties is that they collect votes based on ideology not actions. Technically three isn't enough to avoid this but in general use it implies many third parties, such that governing is no longer one painful voice pushed on everyone, but a consensus of the governed.
- 14y ago
- spiritplumber 14y agoDear DHS, you are welcome to try and steal my stuff. I will be sure to laugh at you when you fail. Further, I will be sure to put it on youtube to share the mirth. Pretty sure this won't damage your credibility any...
- oftenwrong 14y agoWho needs credibility when you have unchecked power?
- tomjen3 14y agoAh, but they don't have unchecked power. Only mostly unchecked. Bigger evils have falled (see Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Assyrian empire, Chile, Argentina, Spain, etc).
- white_devil 14y agoHow will you prevent them from stealing your stuff?
- spiritplumber 14y agoI wonder if this is a CYA for TSA employees who steal stuff out of luggage. "It was a legitimate seizure!" (Fortunately, my equipment can defend itself)
- white_devil 14y agoThat "watchdog" doesn't seem to be doing its job all that well.
- jasonjei 14y agoJust remember to leave important data in the cloud and if you need to access them use a secure storage and protocol (e.g, Dropbox, VPN, etc).
- cantos 14y agoIf they can force you to login to your laptop could they not also force you to login to your Dropbox account?
- chmars 14y agoIf they can force you to login to your laptop, they usually don't have to force you to login to your Dropbox account: Most users are already logged in to Dropbox and all Dropbox data is available in the Dropbox folder by default anyway.
- cantos 14y agoYes that's true. I wonder about the case where the data is not present on the device. I've seen lots of people assert that the government would be powerless in that case. I think this assertion is often made on the basis that the alternative is too horrible to imagine. I hope there are more compelling reasons why this would not be legal but I am doubtful. For example, I have heard of border agents taking phones and calling contacts on them. This is a way of getting data about you from another location. From there it seems like a small step for border agents having the right to get access to your data at the border if it is available to you when you are crossing the border regardless of its physical location.
- jervisfm 14y agoI was just wondering: In the case that the confiscated electronic devices are encrypted, are you obliged to decrypt them or do you have the right to politely refuse ? If not would claiming plausible deniability (I.e I don't know the password) be a viable alternative?
- ScottBurson 14y agoThis is what TrueCrypt is for: giving you plausible deniability.
- stfu 14y agoBut it takes a lot of work and planning to let this look natural. i.e. switching the systems back and forth so the plausible deniable partition looks legit etc.
- jlgreco 14y agoUse the decoy/plausible deniable system for your day to day mundane uses (facebook, netflix, or whatever other computer usage won't be private anyway.), and the 'real' system for your periodic private activities.
- humbert 14y agoIn the US, you are only required to decrypt devices as ordered by court via subpoena.
- largesse 14y agoIn the anecdote in the article, the guy who had his laptop searched was asked for a password. As far as I know, there is no legal basis for compelling a password at the border. He could've just said no. The price would probably be losing the laptop. I've very curious about the legality of password compulsion in the US. With so much moving to cloud storage, the feds are going to lose their picking rights if that don't have that one.
- chmars 14y agoThe price would probably be losing the laptop. … probably after spending hours of uncertaintity in some DHS waiting areas, interrupted only by DHS officers shouting at you from time to time – in case of an American national. For a foreigner, the result could be even more unpleasant. The first part of my just-written paraphrah by the way is standard for the so-called DHS secondary check if you enter the US and some system (or some officer) does not like you for some reason. Regarding cloud storage, most data in the cloud is not encrypted, and if encrypted, only with a provider and not with a user key. Dropbox is a well-known example, i.e., authorities can always ask such providers for data access and they will usually get it.
- largesse 14y ago..if they know the username of the account. Beyond that, I don't think there is any legal basis to compel a password. Do you know of one? I'm curious about it. In the UK, apparently, there is but only for criminal investigations.
- karka91 14y agoOn this note, maybe someone want's to program an application that would select random unused portions of hdd and write random data to them? Something like a daemon/windows service that would take care of the data that hasn't been fully purged by os delete. I would do it myself, but I lack knowledge in low level api's
- cheeseprocedure 14y agoThis application fits your needs on the Windows platform: "Eraser is an advanced security tool for Windows which allows you to completely remove sensitive data from your hard drive by overwriting it several times with carefully selected patterns. Eraser is currently supported under Windows XP (with Service Pack 3), Windows Server 2003 (with Service Pack 2), Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008, Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2." http://eraser.heidi.ie http://eraser.heidi.ie
- chmars 14y agoOverwriting data to safely delete it is usually enough, most of the recommended additional overwriting is snake oil. Unfortunately, overwriting data still takes a lot of time. Using system encryption is therefore easier: You delete the key and your data is as good as overwritten a million times … all modern operation systems offer system encryption by default.
- cheeseprocedure 14y agoDisk encryption wouldn't defeat an attacker that had access to your keys (either by compromising a running system or through a cold-boot attack[1]). If the keys are available, the contents of the disk are accessible. Overwriting deleted files would still have value in these cases. [1] https://jhalderm.com/pub/papers/coldboot-sec08.pdf https://jhalderm.com/pub/papers/coldboot-sec08.pdf
- jlgreco 14y agoDoes this properly work on a modern journal-ed filesystem? My impression of the equivalent linux utilities is that while they appear to work on modern linux filesystems, they no longer provide as much security as you might think.
- nakedrobot2 14y agoDon't forget to put a zip bomb on all your devices. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_bomb http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_bomb
- krrrh 14y agoHere are guidebooks from the EFF and BCCLA detailing your lack of rights at the border and practical steps you can take. 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... http://bccla.org/our_work/electronic-devices-pocket-guide/ http://bccla.org/our_work/electronic-devices-pocket-guide/ Organizations like these and the ACLU do incredibly important work protecting your freedom on relatively small budgets. While a lot of people on the comments here are shocked to read this report, remember that even getting it released is the result of years of pressure from the ACLU. Those of us who benefit most from a free society, and technological progress have a special duty to make a donation and to get involved. It's a worthwhile investment in your future.
- lhnn 14y ago>“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” Well frankly, in that case, I don't give a shit what you conclude, because you're mentally incompetent. "We also conclude that following the Constitution for Americans reentering the country would put us in a bind for looking at whatever we want, so we're going to say that you don't need that right to privacy."
- tptacek 14y agoThe Constitution does not forbid the government from conducting searches without warrants at the border. The word "reasonable" is in the 4th Amendment in order to defer judgement about what searches are and aren't constitutional to the the courts. Unfortunately for your argument, SCOTUS has for many many decades held that border searches are, subject to some limitations, reasonable.
- lhnn 14y agoI think that, aside from disagreeing with most of that principle, it is futile to search the contents of electronic devices at the border. I could ship an encrypted device through mail, I could use steganography and encryption to upload a file to a personal server and have someone immediately unplug said server... there are lots of ways to transport digital files that don't involve the physical device at the border.
- tptacek 14y agoMy response to this is complicated (but I'll keep it short): * I agree with you that anyone who wants to avoid being effectively searched at a border can and there's little the government can ever do about it. * I think most of the people carrying (say) child pornography into the country aren't too bright to begin with, so maybe that doesn't matter. * I remember being very upset about the border search exception when I learned about it 10 years ago. It still bugs me. * If the principal you're disagreeing with is that the state's interests in a secure border outweigh the individual's right to be free from casual, minimally invasive searches, you should know that you're disagreeing with something like 10+ SCOTUS opinions going back to at least the early '70s. * If the principal you're disagreeing with is that the 4th Amendment allows judges to fill in the blanks on what "reasonable" means, and that "reasonable" overrides "warrant", know that you're disagreeing with something like 175 years of jurisprudence. * I definitely agree that electronic searches are nonminimal and highly invasive.
- tptacek 14y agoAren't they just going to lose this at court? The degree of suspicion required for different kinds of border searches is something that has already been tested before SCOTUS.
- throwaway2048 14y agoand a challenge will take many years to go through, meanwhile they are completely free to implement this abusive policy.
- jenncom 14y agoMost people don't know that the USCG has never needed a reason to board and search any boat within US waters, or any US flagged boat anywhere in the world. This doesn't seem much different.
- iuguy 14y agoIt's things like this that mean that I won't go back to America. I love Americans, and there's a great deal of the US I'd love to see but it's just not going to happen while stuff like this goes on.
- tptacek 14y agoMy most vivid experience of traveling in Europe in 2000 was of having my bags searched on a train midway between Zurich to Prague. Not as a condition of getting on the train, but 30 minutes out from the last station we'd stopped at. Not on any individualized suspicion, but as one of several passengers to receive the same treatment. Not in order to protect the safety of passengers, but (evidently) as part of a drug interdiction program. Beware the grass-is-greener trap. You may be right: it may be that there are fewer circumstances in which your electronics will be searched in Europe than in the US. But by and large European law operates under a regime that values communitarian values more highly than individual ones. You can certainly be searched without a warrant all throughout Europe.
- martinced 14y ago"You can certainly be searched without a warrant all throughout Europe." Never happened to me but I do believe you. However what did happen though is that a vehicle of mine equipped with a GPS got stolen in Europe and despite me telling the cops exactly behind which garage door the vehicle was located, they refused to open the garage without a warrant. Now so many days have passed by that it's likely that the thieves have moved the vehicle and that I'll never see it again. "Police and thieves, in the street... Fighting the nation with their guns and ammunition" I cannot say that I admire your 100% belief in the state that you've displayed in this thread. But you're probably right: Europe sucks and the U.S. is the greatest place to live ever and certainly nothing is going wrong in the U.S. right now (zeppelin over Washington DC, en masse murdering using drones, illegal detention, justified torture, etc.). I've got a bridge decorated with pink unicorn running in fairyland to sell you.
- rdouble 14y ago
- malandrew 14y agoDoes the 100 miles apply to ocean borders too? If so, that puts entire cities like NYC, SF, LA, etc. right within this exclusion zone.
- jorgem 14y agoYep: http://www.aclu.org/constitution-free-zone-map http://www.aclu.org/constitution-free-zone-map
- tptacek 14y agoIt is worth knowing that this map is intended to illustrate the absurdity of a specific (old) statement from DHS. It is almost definitely not the case that living in NYC puts you at risk of arbitrary border searches; among other things, SCOTUS has specifically said it doesn't.
- jorgem 14y agoI guess it just applies to folks in the south west, hundreds of miles from the border.
- miami-dade 14y agoWhat I find amazing is how people continue to push for political solutions like "term limits" while ultimately taking no action. Even as we lurch towards an obvious fiscal iceberg, undoubtedly responsible for the abrupt hike in tyrannical measures we've seen as of late, there are plenty of otherwise capable, intelligent people, and even hackers who are seemingly unable to abandon ship. Whatever. History has shown the rich are always the first to leave. I suspect it's because they know more truths about human nature than some would like to believe. Political action towards positive change is absolutely pointless. There's nothing any political party - not left, right nor libertarian - can do to stop America's path to inevitable fiscal crisis and subsequent self-destruction. Not with the political gridlock in Washington. Not with the bozo Ivy League clowns and TBTF banks running the show. Not with more and more people waking up every day to the corruption and lies spewing from the mouths of virtually everyone in Washington DC and all of their supporters and cronies. In short their shit just stinks too badly, and the average person has become too educated and capable to sit there and take all the abuse. America is $16.5 trillion in debt and rising, and there's nothing you can do to make that debt disappear short of printing trillions more dollars to debase it and insodoing completely wipe out the average individual's savings, not to mention piss off other countries. All viable economic and political solutions are too little, too late. You'd better pray for our continued military might every night before you go to sleep, because that's the end game given the way things are going. The only viable move for the U.S. elite is to sink America like Enron, and pray they can keep things under control. Thus the advent of tyrannical control measures. Let the elite continue to have their follies with the savings of average Americans and others who are too blind to see the storm brewing, or too proud to abandon ship. Let them have their gold, their silver, and their perceived political capital aka giant circle jerk. Let them have their warplanes and battleships. Let them continue to send our young to die in their places in exchange for worthless paper green rectangles. The only viable move for the individual is to evacuate the USD before their savings are wiped out. Everyone on HN has the capacity and the short-lived opportunity to move their economic and political activities into the cryptographic realm, where any and all central planning efforts are rendered irrelevant. Therein lies the only remaining true safe haven for economic activity. Love it or hate it, you have no other option but to embrace strong encryption and Bitcoin before your nation, and perhaps the entire global economy descends into a fiscal default scenario right out of your worst nightmares. If you fail to see this risk and the danger it entails, I implore you to utilize public transportation extensively. "Truthfully I do not expect much to change. Practically speaking, history has demonstrated the ability of sovereign nations to justify themselves, and postpone the moment of crisis. This will be even more true for the United States as the largest economy by far with the strongest central bank. As a result, over the course of your lives, you will experience withering but stealthy attacks on your quality of life, as government attempts to manage its faltering finances. You will see declines in the quality of healthcare, the quality of education, the quality of public safety, and the quality of our currency. Of course this is a false prophecy. I am simply describing what is already happening." - Dr. Michael J. Burry [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLhqjOzoyE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLhqjOzoyE