12 ms·

Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

262 points by jpdaigle 12y ago

andrewchambers 12y ago
There is no reason anyone should search a phone, because anyone smuggling "illegal data" can just transfer it directly over the internet undetected. This is horrible and ridiculous.
- stevewepay 12y ago
  They can read through the person's text messages to look for evidence of illegal activities. This happened to one of my friends while trying to enter the US, and she was given a 10 year ban from entering the US because of things written in her text messages. They essentially accused her of trying to engage in immigration fraud because she had texted with one of her friends some jokes about getting married for a green card.
  - loceng 12y ago
    I'm guessing they knew the text messages existed before they requested to see the phone.
    - chc 12y ago
      That seems like a pretty wild guess.
      - loceng 12y ago
        I can only assume you don't know what the NSA has been up to?
        chc 12y ago
        I don't doubt some people in the government have the capability to read people's text messages, but what you're suggesting is way past that. In the scenario you seem to be proposing, some random border agents are not only privy to top-secret NSA projects, but also have access to the data collected by said top-secret projects, and not only that, but they know everybody who's going to drive across the border on a given day, and not only that, but they pre-screen all of those people's data to see who's planning to marry for a green card so that they can manually screen the people's devices and then pretend it was random search. Basically, these people are not the NSA, so assuming that they have the capabilities of the NSA seems a bit far-fetched.
        zero_iq 12y ago
        It doesn't mean anything of the sort. They just need a tip-off at the border. They don't need access to everything or even need to know how or why. They don't even need to know that it's a tip-off: a computer could just spit out "selected for random phone search" and maybe "suspected immigration fraud" when that person reaches border control. The border agent needn't know how or why the selection was made, nor have access to any top-secret data. Just follow instructions. With automated screening using access to a database of everybody's communications, I'm sure you could easily predict more than 80% of the people who cross country borders within 24-hours. For flights, that would be close to 100% accurate. With satnav, you'd probably catch a good portion of the rest who drive across.
        chc 12y ago
        And who do you reckon is doing all of this expensive, technically demanding and legally hazardous work just to catch people getting married for green cards? The NSA does not give a crap about that. If every government agency were dipping into the NSA's cookie jar of secrets so liberally, we'd most likely have known about all these not-so-secret programs years before Snowden ever worked there. It's not impossible, but it's sufficiently implausible that you'd be crazy to bet on it.
        spacemanmatt 12y ago
        I understood (arguably too much) The Cube as an allegory for the intelligence machine we have built/are building. That was a really hard realization. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0123755/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0123755/
    - stevewepay 12y ago
      No, they did not know it existed. I'm sure they suspected something (no idea why), but they just pulled over her entire family's car, and did a blanket search. She was on H1B, so she lost her job and had to fly back to Asia with nothing except the clothes she packed for a weekend road trip to Canada.
      - loceng 12y ago
        They're not going to tell that they already had them (with everyone elses' communications gathered) and then reviewed them.
      - barrkel 12y ago
        More validation of my decision not to move to the US after I got my H-1B.
      - tlrobinson 12y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
    - Someone1234 12y ago
      Why? I've been stopped entering the US for similar reasons, and they searched everything. Read every piece of paper, they even switched on my camera and flicked through the pictures asking me questions about what they found, they didn't search my phone but only because they didn't run across it during the search (my backpack has very many pockets, and they missed a few). I have no doubt at all that they routinely search through people's phones, laptops, tablets, and similar. And if you watch those Passport Patrol style shows where they film in immigration/customs, you can see it is common on there too.
      - loceng 12y ago
        You need to make it commonplace so people become tolerant to it. It doesn't mean there isn't specific targeting done with private data prior to.
        Someone1234 12y ago
        Maybe, but since you have no specific basis or proof that that was the case in the above example, we can just move forward assuming it was part of a common pattern of searches conducted by US immigration and customs on a daily basis.
        loceng 12y ago
        Not really. Both options should be kept on the table, in our minds.
- loceng 12y ago
  Or on a USB or other device that's easily hidden.
- MollyR 12y ago
  Whether its right or wrong, I imagine it's a way to catch low hanging fruit.
- cpncrunch 12y ago
  You could, but if you watch some episodes of "border security" you'll see that they catch people doing illegal stuff all the time by searching their phones. Usually it's illegally working (which obviously wouldn't apply in this case). However they also are looking for child porn, which may be been why they wanted to search this guy's phone.
  - Canada 12y ago
    That's a bullshit excuse border guards give to search electronic storage.
    - cpncrunch 12y ago
      Why is it a "bullshit excuse" if they do actually manage to catch many people by searching phones?
      - Karunamon 12y ago
        It's a bullshit excuse because "protecting the children" are items #1 and #2 on the list of "flimsy justifications for surveillance overreach", right next to "preventing terrorism" at #3. I'm serious. Any time you hear those terms and the discussion is not about speed limits in a school zone, red flags should be going up in your mind. It's not about how many people they catch - even if they had a 100% success rate at nabbing every abuser that crossed the border, it's about civil liberties.
        cpncrunch 12y ago
        I was simply pointing out the reason for the searches. As it stands, the law currently lets them do these searches, and I was explaining the reasoning behind these searches (which should be pretty obvious to anyone who has watched those TV shows). As for why they want to search for pedophiles at airports: the reason is presumably because there is a serious problem of child sex tourism in certain countries (Thailand for example). You could use the same argument about guns or drugs -- why search people who they suspect are carrying guns or drugs? The reasoning is presumably that stopping these at the border prevents them from coming into the country. To be honest I don't have a problem with being searched at airports. IMO the small inconvenience is outweighed by the benefit of putting the occasional pedophile in jail, preventing diseases from fruit/meat entering our country, and criminals bringing machine guns into the country, etc. I guess from the downvotes and comments that a lot of HN posters have a different opinion.
- gav 12y ago
  Unlocking my phone for border officials in 2013 when I arrived in Canada cost me about $300. They turned on cellular data when it was left in airplane mode so they could search through my emails. I fly internationally on business and the Canadian border officials are the worst I've run across.
  - driverdan 12y ago
    Why didn't you refuse the search?
  - shard 12y ago
    This brings up an interesting point. Next time I fly with my smartphone, I am going to remove my SIM card so that something like this doesn't happen.
sneak 12y ago
The idea of nations and borders is one the time for has passed. I personally don't care what invisible, made-up lines you were born within or without. Do you?
- robertfw 12y ago
  I agree completely. The whole system of states is based on violence, past and present. Sadly I don't see it going away any time soon.
- chc 12y ago
  This sounds more like a platitude than a thought I can actually agree or disagree with. What does it even mean? You want to abolish rule of law? You want everybody to be ruled by the Communist Party of China (now the Community Party of The World)? You just want everybody to behave the way you imagine people ought to behave in a utopia?
  - Zigurd 12y ago
    Many parts of the world had not formed into modern nations states 300 years ago. Surely there was the rule of law in many places without the current idea of nations. There is no a priori reason the current political organization of people is eternal, or even very durable.
    - chc 12y ago
      Your comment seems to hinge on the nuance of phrases like "modern nations", "the current idea of nations" and "current political organization of people", but I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean and what you're trying to distinguish it from. If you mean that the precise set of nations and territories that exists today is not fundamental or permanent, that's obviously true, but it doesn't seem to have any bearing on anything.
    - vacri 12y ago
      By 'not durable', do you mean 'the concept stretches as far back as we have written records'? Yes, 'nations' meaning 'something that gives you a passport' haven't been around long, but 'nations' meaning 'geopolitical entities' is as old as record-keeping itself. And what do you mean by 'rule of law'? Do the decisions of tribal elders count? That doesn't suggest consistency, which is the spirit of the term.
DennisP 12y ago
Smartphones should have optional extra user accounts, with no indication of whether they exist. Same phone number, but the account you use is the one that records the history. Keep one mostly clean and that's the one you unlock.
- higherpurpose 12y ago
  Android 5.0 does. It's actually quite hidden and I only found out about it by mistake when playing with my new update (although I remembered Google announced it earlier after that, but had forgotten about it). More operating systems should be doing this, including desktop ones. Windows makes multiple accounts too obvious.
  - pedalpete 12y ago
    Why would this get downvoted??
- GigabyteCoin 12y ago
  That sounds a lot like how TrueCrypt worked, before the developers discontinued it's development for unknown reasons.
brandon272 12y ago
Where's the line? If you give them your lock screen PIN can they then request your bank app password? The credentials for your work VPN?
- TheCraiggers 12y ago
  There is no line, except perhaps for the first one. This is why so many of us are totally against crossing that first line and giving up passwords. After that, tis a very steep, slippery slope indeed.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
ignostic 12y ago
Customs officials forcing you to unlock your phone is not just an invasion of privacy - it's a pointless invasion of privacy. Customs agents don't even know where to start in finding data that a user wants hidden. Even if allowed access to personal devices, data is slippery enough that it could be stored in almost anything. Here's yet another example of taking away rights in a way that does nothing to deter actual crime. Hopefully the court understands technology enough to make the right call, but I'm not counting on it.
- cpncrunch 12y ago
  I suspect that the people they're trying to catch by doing these searches (pedophiles, illegal workers) are generally too stupid or lazy to bother hiding their data. At least, that seems to be the case when watching Border Security. They do actually catch a lot of people this way.
  - malkia 12y ago
    So you would catch the lazy criminals, and maybe even victims of such act, where things were done on their devices without their knowledge... I've read recently about new kind of software, that encrypts your data without your knowledge and then asks you for money to unlock it - wondering how this would play in courts...
    - lightbritefight 12y ago
      It sounds like an encryption suite that had had an included "crytpolocker" gui element would be a hilarious method plausible deniability, and at least make this asinine habit harder. Just randomly generate the BT address so some strangers get paid if the border agents want to try to unlock something they have confiscated.
- DanBC 12y ago
  Like David Miranda? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald-guardian-partner-detained-heathrow http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald...
guard-of-terra 12y ago
Does our world have even one country that is not awful but at least passable? (Preferrably one you can actually live in?) The shrinking life space makes me contemplate suicide.
- markcerqueira 12y ago
  If you're actually contemplating suicide (and just making an insensitive joke), you should talk to someone bro.
  - guard-of-terra 12y ago
    Am not I already? The problem is not in suppressing impulses, but in finding a way to live a satisfactory life. Which is becoming harder and harder. Rationally, why continue living if you feel under water most of time?
    - 13 12y ago
      I find it particularly hard to keep my head up with this sort of thing too. What you're saying isn't untrue, but I haven't found a particular solution to any of it.
- MollyR 12y ago
  I understand that feeling too. I feel like the digital world is becoming extremely claustrophobic, and I'm beginning to feel paranoid since the wikileaks and Snowden leaks.
- cpncrunch 12y ago
  Despite this, Canada is still one of the best countries to live in, IMO. It's still safer and more free than virtually any other country in the world (including the USA). The only lack of freedom is the possibility of being shipped in handcuffs to the USA if you do something that is perfectly legal in Canada but illegal in the USA (mailing cannabis seeds or running an online gambling business for example). However even that slight lack of freedom isn't really an issue for the vast majority of people.
akamaka 12y ago
Here's the section of the law that he was charged under: False statements, evasion of duties 153. No person shall (b) to avoid compliance with this Act or the regulations, (i) destroy, alter, mutilate, secrete or dispose of records or books of account, (ii) make, or participate in, assent to or acquiesce in the making of, false or deceptive entries in records or books of account, or (iii) omit, or participate in, assent to or acquiesce in the omission of, a material particular from records or books of account; I'm not a lawyer, but I would be pretty dismayed if a court agrees that this covers withholding a password.
- DannyBee 12y ago
  I"m a US lawyer, and uh, this looks remarkably weak of a charge unless their is some canadian precedent somewhere that says "records or books of account" covers "random shit on non-business phone"
  - giarc 12y ago
    I believe I read that this type of case has not been tested in Canadian courts yet.
- Spoom 12y ago
  That seems to indicate that clearing your phone immediately prior to crossing the border would also be illegal.
udev 12y ago
"Under the Customs Act, customs officers are allowed to inspect things that you have, that you're bringing into the country," - Here's my phone, sir. - I see it has a password, give me the password. - Mhhh... OK. It is 1234. - Oh, I see you have Dropbox app installed. I need the Dropbox password. - Mhhh... OK. It is 5678. - Oh I see you have a GPG encrypted file in Dropbox. I will need to decrypt that. Give me the password. - Mhhh... I can't... It's encrypted with a public key and I don't have the private key on me. - Ok, boys! Take this guy! He is clearly obstructing.
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  Could you not backup your device, wipe it at the border, and then when they request the password simply say "There is no data on the device. Its as it comes from the factory" and hand it to them? You could then perform an over the air recovery once safely away from the border.
  - MagicWishMonkey 12y ago
    The whole point is that sort of thing shouldn't be necessary. The government shouldn't have the authority to demand you hand over the contents of your phone/laptop without reasonable suspicion in the first place.
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      I'm not saying it should be necessary. It SHOULDN'T be. I shouldn't have to pay $100 every 5 years for Global Entry/PreCheck even though I'm already not a risk on the air transport network, but I do because the time savings is ridiculous. What I'm saying is: Can X be done until sanity has been restored to Y? It appears that, yes, it can.
  - lugg 12y ago
    There is a reason people call it a theater..
  - Zigurd 12y ago
    If you have an Android device and you automatically upload pictures, doing a factory reset before crossing a border will remove all your data. Then all you need is an empty/dummy Google account, in case you are asked to log-in.
shpx 12y ago
Do we not have a "you shall not be compelled to testify against your own person" in Canada? For those unaware, here in Canada they've started playing catch-up ever since the snowden leaks, and they've been doing it with the same strategy (wait for any kind of terrorist attack and manipulate the people)
nasalgoat 12y ago
Border guards had me unlock my phone to check text messages and my emails in regards to a car I was trying to import, to see if I was lying about the value. I wasn't. It was horrible but refusing meant serious fines and perhaps jail time.
- brandon272 12y ago
  Did they go through your phone because you told them you had text messages and/or emails where the value was discussed?
  - nasalgoat 12y ago
    No, I brought out my phone to bring up an email showing the ebay ad for the car in question and at that point they asked me to hand over my phone. From now on, I'm backing it up and wiping it before I get to the border. Just on principle.
    - mattm 12y ago
      Unfortunately, the best policy when dealing with these people is "say and do as little as possible". Give one word answers and don't offer any other information that you're specifically asked for. Also, don't engage in any friendly conversation. I tried that before and would get hounded by questions whereas if I just answer "Yes", "no", "2 weeks", "travelling" then I get through much more quickly.
      - kylegordon 12y ago
        I ended up in a conversation with a moronic border security twat on my only ever business trip to the states. "So your company writes software for Americans?" "So an American company bought your company?" "So your company is now owned by Americans? Why didn't they write the software here?" "If it's now American, why can't the training be provided by Americans?" I was pretty sure he was going to ask why the fuck I wasn't time travelling in order to ensure everything was done by Americans. All this after enduring repeated announcements for military personnel to come and enjoy the FREEDOM LOUNGE in Denver or Detroit, whatever shithole it was that I was travelling through. From my view as a non-American? Farcical.
jaybuff 12y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California
- CanSpice 12y ago
  American case law doesn't really hold for Canada.
  - mikesko 12y ago
    And in any case, at borders there is not the same level of protection as within the country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception "This doctrine is not actually an exception to the Fourth Amendment, but rather to the Amendment's requirement for a warrant or probable cause. Balanced against the sovereign's interests at the border are the Fourth Amendment rights of entrants. Not only is the expectation of privacy less at the border than in the interior,the Fourth Amendment balance between the interests of the Government and the privacy right of the individual is also struck much more favorably to the Government at the border.This balance at international borders means that routine searches are "reasonable" there, and therefore do not violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against "unreasonable searches and seizures"
    - waqf 12y ago
      > Not only is the expectation of privacy less at the border than in the interior ... Begging the question, wouldn't you say? The only reason there is less expectation of privacy at the border is because of government policies, like this one, whose constitutionality is open to question.
    - mikesko 12y ago
      > Begging the question, wouldn't you say? Yes I would!
  - mikesko 12y ago
    Also see United States v Ickes http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/U.S._v._Ickes http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/U.S._v._Ickes
coldcode 12y ago
It's actually a good thing they charged him, as now there is a case with standing to determine the legality of this practice. If he wins it creates a precedent if he loses a reason to dispense with the current leadership. Imagine if they tried to force all visitors to divulge their password in order to snoop on the phones. Goodbye vacation business.
- r00fus 12y ago
  So if he's lucky he'll been "precedented" [1]. Would you take that risk for the good of everyone, especially when it could go wrong? As much as I'd like to say yes, I'm not sure I would. [1] http://goo.gl/uvIkmC http://goo.gl/uvIkmC
allendoerfer 12y ago
As a European I have to say, that I associate these sort of things with totalitarian regimes and it is just unimaginable for me why the American society tolerates this while fighting for democracy elsewhere.
- robertfw 12y ago
  just fyi, this was in Canada. just as bad :(
  - allendoerfer 12y ago
    Canada is in America, I knew that this would come, could not resist the bait ;-) Arguably the last part applies less to Canada.
    - PeterWhittaker 12y ago
      Them's fighting words, Eurasian! Oh, yeah, it sort of is, isn't it. Sorry. Here, have a maple doughnut.
    - happyscrappy 12y ago
      If smugness had value Europe would be a superpower and not a toothless windbag.
      - allendoerfer 12y ago
        I would argue that articles like these indicate, that the people of Europe indeed have more power as citizens than people of other countries. I do not see how Europe would benefit from being a superpower again.
        happyscrappy 12y ago
        It would be pointless anyway because Europe is too important to US power to be trusted with their own defense.
jefstratiou 12y ago
Unfortunately for our good hero at the border, this mess all needs to be tested in the courts. He's just the prop for whatever organizations want to line up behind him. Just as the 'prosecutors' will be the prop for the actors lined up behind the definition of their current policies. See you in a decade when this all shakes out.
PeterWhittaker 12y ago
Interesting. I don't have a password. And I defy you to unlock my phone. The question is "Can I be forced to unlock my own phone? Under what circumstances? Under what circumstances can I be charged for refusing to do so?" If you haven't already guessed, I use a complex swipe pattern, one that uses all nine points and cannot be determined from reading the grease streaks, at least not easily. I know this because I moved to the current pattern after my daughter unlocked my phone by reading the grease streak. I changed the pattern and handed it back. It even used the previous pattern. She took one luck, uttered an obscenity, and handed back the phone. Can I be compelled to describe how to perform the swipe? To describe the pattern? To guide the agent? Interesting questions....
- hnnewguy 12y ago
  >Can I be compelled to describe how to perform the swipe? To describe the pattern? To guide the agent? Yes, yes and yes. Until there is legal precedent, if they want into your phone and you don't provide them access, you'll be in trouble. Any "cleverness" regarding a security code will likely make it worse.
  - seanp2k2 12y ago
    And this is why deniable encryption is important: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption
- patmcc 12y ago
  A swipe pattern is no different than a password, either legally or practically speaking. It's just a nine digit number (with restrictions); the fact that it's swiped instead of entered is for ease of your own memory, nothing else.
cesarb 12y ago
Giving someone the password allows more than just looking around. Giving someone the password also allows them to modify the data on the device. Even if you "have nothing to hide", this is worrying. Who knows what has been changed on your device?
qu1mby 12y ago
Deplorable. Where notebooks are concerned, it reminds me of a TrueCrypt decoy password feature that would unlock a 'clean' hidden volume when entered in place of your 'working' volume password. Might be mistaken, though.
powertower 12y ago
Please look into the details of the court papers before making a judgement. I would say that at least 70-80% of these stories leave out very important details and contexts - to mold what happened to fit whatever narrative the spinners subscribe to. For example - The person could have been importing a large amount of goods with him that exceeded the value he stated. Once questioned about the disparity, he might have made statements about having the transactions documented in his phone. The boarder agents would then have asked to see those transactions. Or even said, "could you just turn on your phone, move the screen towards us, and show us (or just email it to us so we can print out and attach the record to your declaration)". I've looked into pretty much every major story, and once you get passed the superficial reporting, and into the actual details, it becomes depressingly clear that the media (at all levels and all sides) are just political (or ideological) organizations that filter, mold, and in a lot of cases make up, everything they put out.
- tomek_zemla 12y ago
  Actually majority of people searched going through borders turn out to be perfectly innocent... Which means that if the law does allow officers to search everybody's personal information on their electronic devices they can browse at will my personal communication every time I cross the border. One good thing about this story is that electronic device searches on Canadian borders are somewhat in the legal grey zone and this will force the courts to clarify the rules. And... allow public to voice their approval or disapproval of this ongoing practice.
  - powertower 12y ago
    I don't think I was stating otherwise.
gnud 12y ago
At least with a password you can refuse. With a fingerprint it's very easy to actually force you to unlock your device.
userbinator 12y ago
I wonder if it would be considered even more suspicious to not carry any phones or other electronic devices at all across a border?
wongarsu 12y ago
Them being allowed to search my phone is one thing, but how is not unlocking it "obstructing border officials"? Where I come from (Europe), you aren't required by law to help police (or border officials). If they come with a warrant to search your house and your door is closed, you aren't allowed to obstruct them by barricading your door but you are not required to help them by opening your door either (be prepared to pay for your new door though). Is that different in Canada?
kazinator 12y ago
Since the digital storage of a phone cannot contain a firearm, explosive, blade, protected species of plant or animal, or a pork sausage, they have no goddamned business.
JohnTHaller 12y ago
We should frame this story with what the actual end result of 'unlocking your phone' is when discussing it. The government routinely claims that it is no different than asking a traveler to open a physical briefcase. It is very different. If you're treating the phone as a 'good' as indicated in the quotes on this story, you can inspect my phone as a good. You can look at the phone. You can xray it. You can open up the back cover to ensure it's a real battery inside and not something more sinister. All that would be fine and fall within what the law was intended for. What the government is actually asking you to do is unlock your digital key to your entire digital identity for them to do with as they wish. Your phone has direct access to all your email accounts, all your personal and work files within the cloud (Dropbox, Box, iCloud, Google Drive, etc), your entire address book, your chat history, all your personal photos, your private PGP you use to sign communications to prove they came from you, etc, etc. Asking to inspect your phone is fine. Asking to have complete access to your entire digital life, history, and identity is not. If I'm asked for the former, go ahead and inspect it, I put it through the scanner on every flight. If I'm asked for the latter, the answer will be no.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  Right. No one needs to import data via physical presence, so customs simply doesn't need to inspect the data on devices. If someone wanted to bring contraband in, they simply can download it over the Internet, no customs searches needed. This is vastly different than physical goods inside boxes or briefcases, which all physically pass through the border in an inspectable manner.
  - click170 12y ago
    I predict they will claim to be hunting for child pornography and similar contraband. Despite the argument being silly, as pointed out by yourself.
    - spacemanmatt 12y ago
      s/silly/cynical
towelguy 12y ago
Why is someone looking at your cellphone not in the same privacy level as someone reading your mail? Would customs officials ask to read your letters?
lasermike026 12y ago
This kind of thing is a big f'ing deal breaker.
joe_developer 12y ago
Idea: When you're traveling change your settings to load the grub shell -- they ask for the password and you can say, "There is no password. It's a Linux grub-shell, just type the commands you want the computer to execute."
tomek_zemla 12y ago
Here is an idea for workaround. Have two passwords. One normal, the other one wipes out the phone. Back up your device to the cloud before you travel. Hand it in with a good smile and bad password...
lxfontes 12y ago
relevant: http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/06/charge-your-phone-before-flying-tsa-will-now-block-dead-devices-at-some-airports/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/06/charge-your-phone-before-fl...
Absentinsomniac 12y ago
I hear they can even copy your whole drive and send the contents off for analysis: http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-u-s-border-a-constitution-free-zone-where-officials-can-grab-your-computer-and-copy-your-hard-drive http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-u-s-border-a-c...
quipp 12y ago
out of curiosity, I wonder what would happen if an app was made to lock the phone down for a period of time or some other future forward criteria. Can they charge you when you don't actually know the password.
dghughes 12y ago
This gives me an idea for an app to make for mobile phones. Leave the phone off or turn it off before you get to the airport Security line then when you turn it on the app auto-starts which makes the phone slowly boot. Then when the phone does finally boot it shows a fake screen showing "Installing update 1 of 44" and make it so it never ends. My password is my index finger I should change it to my middle finger, my password is written down and really complex I'd never be able to remember it without seeing it.

262 points by jpdaigle 12y ago

There is no reason anyone should search a phone, because anyone smuggling "illegal data" can just transfer it directly over the internet undetected. This is horrible and ridiculous.

stevewepay 12y ago
They can read through the person's text messages to look for evidence of illegal activities. This happened to one of my friends while trying to enter the US, and she was given a 10 year ban from entering the US because of things written in her text messages. They essentially accused her of trying to engage in immigration fraud because she had texted with one of her friends some jokes about getting married for a green card.
- loceng 12y ago
  I'm guessing they knew the text messages existed before they requested to see the phone.
  - chc 12y ago
    That seems like a pretty wild guess.
    - loceng 12y ago
      I can only assume you don't know what the NSA has been up to?
      - chc 12y ago
        I don't doubt some people in the government have the capability to read people's text messages, but what you're suggesting is way past that. In the scenario you seem to be proposing, some random border agents are not only privy to top-secret NSA projects, but also have access to the data collected by said top-secret projects, and not only that, but they know everybody who's going to drive across the border on a given day, and not only that, but they pre-screen all of those people's data to see who's planning to marry for a green card so that they can manually screen the people's devices and then pretend it was random search. Basically, these people are not the NSA, so assuming that they have the capabilities of the NSA seems a bit far-fetched.
        zero_iq 12y ago
        It doesn't mean anything of the sort. They just need a tip-off at the border. They don't need access to everything or even need to know how or why. They don't even need to know that it's a tip-off: a computer could just spit out "selected for random phone search" and maybe "suspected immigration fraud" when that person reaches border control. The border agent needn't know how or why the selection was made, nor have access to any top-secret data. Just follow instructions. With automated screening using access to a database of everybody's communications, I'm sure you could easily predict more than 80% of the people who cross country borders within 24-hours. For flights, that would be close to 100% accurate. With satnav, you'd probably catch a good portion of the rest who drive across.
        chc 12y ago
        And who do you reckon is doing all of this expensive, technically demanding and legally hazardous work just to catch people getting married for green cards? The NSA does not give a crap about that. If every government agency were dipping into the NSA's cookie jar of secrets so liberally, we'd most likely have known about all these not-so-secret programs years before Snowden ever worked there. It's not impossible, but it's sufficiently implausible that you'd be crazy to bet on it.
        spacemanmatt 12y ago
        I understood (arguably too much) The Cube as an allegory for the intelligence machine we have built/are building. That was a really hard realization. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0123755/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0123755/
  - stevewepay 12y ago
    No, they did not know it existed. I'm sure they suspected something (no idea why), but they just pulled over her entire family's car, and did a blanket search. She was on H1B, so she lost her job and had to fly back to Asia with nothing except the clothes she packed for a weekend road trip to Canada.
    - loceng 12y ago
      They're not going to tell that they already had them (with everyone elses' communications gathered) and then reviewed them.
    - barrkel 12y ago
      More validation of my decision not to move to the US after I got my H-1B.
    - tlrobinson 12y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
  - Someone1234 12y ago
    Why? I've been stopped entering the US for similar reasons, and they searched everything. Read every piece of paper, they even switched on my camera and flicked through the pictures asking me questions about what they found, they didn't search my phone but only because they didn't run across it during the search (my backpack has very many pockets, and they missed a few). I have no doubt at all that they routinely search through people's phones, laptops, tablets, and similar. And if you watch those Passport Patrol style shows where they film in immigration/customs, you can see it is common on there too.
    - loceng 12y ago
      You need to make it commonplace so people become tolerant to it. It doesn't mean there isn't specific targeting done with private data prior to.
      - Someone1234 12y ago
        Maybe, but since you have no specific basis or proof that that was the case in the above example, we can just move forward assuming it was part of a common pattern of searches conducted by US immigration and customs on a daily basis.
        loceng 12y ago
        Not really. Both options should be kept on the table, in our minds.
loceng 12y ago
Or on a USB or other device that's easily hidden.
MollyR 12y ago
Whether its right or wrong, I imagine it's a way to catch low hanging fruit.
cpncrunch 12y ago
You could, but if you watch some episodes of "border security" you'll see that they catch people doing illegal stuff all the time by searching their phones. Usually it's illegally working (which obviously wouldn't apply in this case). However they also are looking for child porn, which may be been why they wanted to search this guy's phone.
- Canada 12y ago
  That's a bullshit excuse border guards give to search electronic storage.
  - cpncrunch 12y ago
    Why is it a "bullshit excuse" if they do actually manage to catch many people by searching phones?
    - Karunamon 12y ago
      It's a bullshit excuse because "protecting the children" are items #1 and #2 on the list of "flimsy justifications for surveillance overreach", right next to "preventing terrorism" at #3. I'm serious. Any time you hear those terms and the discussion is not about speed limits in a school zone, red flags should be going up in your mind. It's not about how many people they catch - even if they had a 100% success rate at nabbing every abuser that crossed the border, it's about civil liberties.
      - cpncrunch 12y ago
        I was simply pointing out the reason for the searches. As it stands, the law currently lets them do these searches, and I was explaining the reasoning behind these searches (which should be pretty obvious to anyone who has watched those TV shows). As for why they want to search for pedophiles at airports: the reason is presumably because there is a serious problem of child sex tourism in certain countries (Thailand for example). You could use the same argument about guns or drugs -- why search people who they suspect are carrying guns or drugs? The reasoning is presumably that stopping these at the border prevents them from coming into the country. To be honest I don't have a problem with being searched at airports. IMO the small inconvenience is outweighed by the benefit of putting the occasional pedophile in jail, preventing diseases from fruit/meat entering our country, and criminals bringing machine guns into the country, etc. I guess from the downvotes and comments that a lot of HN posters have a different opinion.
gav 12y ago
Unlocking my phone for border officials in 2013 when I arrived in Canada cost me about $300. They turned on cellular data when it was left in airplane mode so they could search through my emails. I fly internationally on business and the Canadian border officials are the worst I've run across.
- driverdan 12y ago
  Why didn't you refuse the search?
- shard 12y ago
  This brings up an interesting point. Next time I fly with my smartphone, I am going to remove my SIM card so that something like this doesn't happen.

sneak 12y ago

The idea of nations and borders is one the time for has passed. I personally don't care what invisible, made-up lines you were born within or without. Do you?

robertfw 12y ago
I agree completely. The whole system of states is based on violence, past and present. Sadly I don't see it going away any time soon.
chc 12y ago
This sounds more like a platitude than a thought I can actually agree or disagree with. What does it even mean? You want to abolish rule of law? You want everybody to be ruled by the Communist Party of China (now the Community Party of The World)? You just want everybody to behave the way you imagine people ought to behave in a utopia?
- Zigurd 12y ago
  Many parts of the world had not formed into modern nations states 300 years ago. Surely there was the rule of law in many places without the current idea of nations. There is no a priori reason the current political organization of people is eternal, or even very durable.
  - chc 12y ago
    Your comment seems to hinge on the nuance of phrases like "modern nations", "the current idea of nations" and "current political organization of people", but I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean and what you're trying to distinguish it from. If you mean that the precise set of nations and territories that exists today is not fundamental or permanent, that's obviously true, but it doesn't seem to have any bearing on anything.
  - vacri 12y ago
    By 'not durable', do you mean 'the concept stretches as far back as we have written records'? Yes, 'nations' meaning 'something that gives you a passport' haven't been around long, but 'nations' meaning 'geopolitical entities' is as old as record-keeping itself. And what do you mean by 'rule of law'? Do the decisions of tribal elders count? That doesn't suggest consistency, which is the spirit of the term.

DennisP 12y ago

Smartphones should have optional extra user accounts, with no indication of whether they exist. Same phone number, but the account you use is the one that records the history. Keep one mostly clean and that's the one you unlock.

higherpurpose 12y ago
Android 5.0 does. It's actually quite hidden and I only found out about it by mistake when playing with my new update (although I remembered Google announced it earlier after that, but had forgotten about it). More operating systems should be doing this, including desktop ones. Windows makes multiple accounts too obvious.
- pedalpete 12y ago
  Why would this get downvoted??
GigabyteCoin 12y ago
That sounds a lot like how TrueCrypt worked, before the developers discontinued it's development for unknown reasons.

brandon272 12y ago

Where's the line? If you give them your lock screen PIN can they then request your bank app password? The credentials for your work VPN?

TheCraiggers 12y ago
There is no line, except perhaps for the first one. This is why so many of us are totally against crossing that first line and giving up passwords. After that, tis a very steep, slippery slope indeed.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

ignostic 12y ago

Customs officials forcing you to unlock your phone is not just an invasion of privacy - it's a pointless invasion of privacy. Customs agents don't even know where to start in finding data that a user wants hidden. Even if allowed access to personal devices, data is slippery enough that it could be stored in almost anything. Here's yet another example of taking away rights in a way that does nothing to deter actual crime. Hopefully the court understands technology enough to make the right call, but I'm not counting on it.

cpncrunch 12y ago
I suspect that the people they're trying to catch by doing these searches (pedophiles, illegal workers) are generally too stupid or lazy to bother hiding their data. At least, that seems to be the case when watching Border Security. They do actually catch a lot of people this way.
- malkia 12y ago
  So you would catch the lazy criminals, and maybe even victims of such act, where things were done on their devices without their knowledge... I've read recently about new kind of software, that encrypts your data without your knowledge and then asks you for money to unlock it - wondering how this would play in courts...
  - lightbritefight 12y ago
    It sounds like an encryption suite that had had an included "crytpolocker" gui element would be a hilarious method plausible deniability, and at least make this asinine habit harder. Just randomly generate the BT address so some strangers get paid if the border agents want to try to unlock something they have confiscated.
DanBC 12y ago
Like David Miranda? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald-guardian-partner-detained-heathrow http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald...

guard-of-terra 12y ago

Does our world have even one country that is not awful but at least passable? (Preferrably one you can actually live in?) The shrinking life space makes me contemplate suicide.

markcerqueira 12y ago
If you're actually contemplating suicide (and just making an insensitive joke), you should talk to someone bro.
- guard-of-terra 12y ago
  Am not I already? The problem is not in suppressing impulses, but in finding a way to live a satisfactory life. Which is becoming harder and harder. Rationally, why continue living if you feel under water most of time?
  - 13 12y ago
    I find it particularly hard to keep my head up with this sort of thing too. What you're saying isn't untrue, but I haven't found a particular solution to any of it.
MollyR 12y ago
I understand that feeling too. I feel like the digital world is becoming extremely claustrophobic, and I'm beginning to feel paranoid since the wikileaks and Snowden leaks.
cpncrunch 12y ago
Despite this, Canada is still one of the best countries to live in, IMO. It's still safer and more free than virtually any other country in the world (including the USA). The only lack of freedom is the possibility of being shipped in handcuffs to the USA if you do something that is perfectly legal in Canada but illegal in the USA (mailing cannabis seeds or running an online gambling business for example). However even that slight lack of freedom isn't really an issue for the vast majority of people.

akamaka 12y ago

Here's the section of the law that he was charged under: False statements, evasion of duties 153. No person shall (b) to avoid compliance with this Act or the regulations, (i) destroy, alter, mutilate, secrete or dispose of records or books of account, (ii) make, or participate in, assent to or acquiesce in the making of, false or deceptive entries in records or books of account, or (iii) omit, or participate in, assent to or acquiesce in the omission of, a material particular from records or books of account; I'm not a lawyer, but I would be pretty dismayed if a court agrees that this covers withholding a password.

DannyBee 12y ago
I"m a US lawyer, and uh, this looks remarkably weak of a charge unless their is some canadian precedent somewhere that says "records or books of account" covers "random shit on non-business phone"
- giarc 12y ago
  I believe I read that this type of case has not been tested in Canadian courts yet.
Spoom 12y ago
That seems to indicate that clearing your phone immediately prior to crossing the border would also be illegal.

udev 12y ago

"Under the Customs Act, customs officers are allowed to inspect things that you have, that you're bringing into the country," - Here's my phone, sir. - I see it has a password, give me the password. - Mhhh... OK. It is 1234. - Oh, I see you have Dropbox app installed. I need the Dropbox password. - Mhhh... OK. It is 5678. - Oh I see you have a GPG encrypted file in Dropbox. I will need to decrypt that. Give me the password. - Mhhh... I can't... It's encrypted with a public key and I don't have the private key on me. - Ok, boys! Take this guy! He is clearly obstructing.

toomuchtodo 12y ago
Could you not backup your device, wipe it at the border, and then when they request the password simply say "There is no data on the device. Its as it comes from the factory" and hand it to them? You could then perform an over the air recovery once safely away from the border.
- MagicWishMonkey 12y ago
  The whole point is that sort of thing shouldn't be necessary. The government shouldn't have the authority to demand you hand over the contents of your phone/laptop without reasonable suspicion in the first place.
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    I'm not saying it should be necessary. It SHOULDN'T be. I shouldn't have to pay $100 every 5 years for Global Entry/PreCheck even though I'm already not a risk on the air transport network, but I do because the time savings is ridiculous. What I'm saying is: Can X be done until sanity has been restored to Y? It appears that, yes, it can.
- lugg 12y ago
  There is a reason people call it a theater..
- Zigurd 12y ago
  If you have an Android device and you automatically upload pictures, doing a factory reset before crossing a border will remove all your data. Then all you need is an empty/dummy Google account, in case you are asked to log-in.

shpx 12y ago

Do we not have a "you shall not be compelled to testify against your own person" in Canada? For those unaware, here in Canada they've started playing catch-up ever since the snowden leaks, and they've been doing it with the same strategy (wait for any kind of terrorist attack and manipulate the people)

nasalgoat 12y ago

Border guards had me unlock my phone to check text messages and my emails in regards to a car I was trying to import, to see if I was lying about the value. I wasn't. It was horrible but refusing meant serious fines and perhaps jail time.

brandon272 12y ago
Did they go through your phone because you told them you had text messages and/or emails where the value was discussed?
- nasalgoat 12y ago
  No, I brought out my phone to bring up an email showing the ebay ad for the car in question and at that point they asked me to hand over my phone. From now on, I'm backing it up and wiping it before I get to the border. Just on principle.
  - mattm 12y ago
    Unfortunately, the best policy when dealing with these people is "say and do as little as possible". Give one word answers and don't offer any other information that you're specifically asked for. Also, don't engage in any friendly conversation. I tried that before and would get hounded by questions whereas if I just answer "Yes", "no", "2 weeks", "travelling" then I get through much more quickly.
    - kylegordon 12y ago
      I ended up in a conversation with a moronic border security twat on my only ever business trip to the states. "So your company writes software for Americans?" "So an American company bought your company?" "So your company is now owned by Americans? Why didn't they write the software here?" "If it's now American, why can't the training be provided by Americans?" I was pretty sure he was going to ask why the fuck I wasn't time travelling in order to ensure everything was done by Americans. All this after enduring repeated announcements for military personnel to come and enjoy the FREEDOM LOUNGE in Denver or Detroit, whatever shithole it was that I was travelling through. From my view as a non-American? Farcical.

jaybuff 12y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California

CanSpice 12y ago
American case law doesn't really hold for Canada.
- mikesko 12y ago
  And in any case, at borders there is not the same level of protection as within the country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception "This doctrine is not actually an exception to the Fourth Amendment, but rather to the Amendment's requirement for a warrant or probable cause. Balanced against the sovereign's interests at the border are the Fourth Amendment rights of entrants. Not only is the expectation of privacy less at the border than in the interior,the Fourth Amendment balance between the interests of the Government and the privacy right of the individual is also struck much more favorably to the Government at the border.This balance at international borders means that routine searches are "reasonable" there, and therefore do not violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against "unreasonable searches and seizures"
  - waqf 12y ago
    > Not only is the expectation of privacy less at the border than in the interior ... Begging the question, wouldn't you say? The only reason there is less expectation of privacy at the border is because of government policies, like this one, whose constitutionality is open to question.
  - mikesko 12y ago
    > Begging the question, wouldn't you say? Yes I would!
- mikesko 12y ago
  Also see United States v Ickes http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/U.S._v._Ickes http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/U.S._v._Ickes

coldcode 12y ago

It's actually a good thing they charged him, as now there is a case with standing to determine the legality of this practice. If he wins it creates a precedent if he loses a reason to dispense with the current leadership. Imagine if they tried to force all visitors to divulge their password in order to snoop on the phones. Goodbye vacation business.

r00fus 12y ago
So if he's lucky he'll been "precedented" [1]. Would you take that risk for the good of everyone, especially when it could go wrong? As much as I'd like to say yes, I'm not sure I would. [1] http://goo.gl/uvIkmC http://goo.gl/uvIkmC

allendoerfer 12y ago

As a European I have to say, that I associate these sort of things with totalitarian regimes and it is just unimaginable for me why the American society tolerates this while fighting for democracy elsewhere.

robertfw 12y ago
just fyi, this was in Canada. just as bad :(
- allendoerfer 12y ago
  Canada is in America, I knew that this would come, could not resist the bait ;-) Arguably the last part applies less to Canada.
  - PeterWhittaker 12y ago
    Them's fighting words, Eurasian! Oh, yeah, it sort of is, isn't it. Sorry. Here, have a maple doughnut.
  - happyscrappy 12y ago
    If smugness had value Europe would be a superpower and not a toothless windbag.
    - allendoerfer 12y ago
      I would argue that articles like these indicate, that the people of Europe indeed have more power as citizens than people of other countries. I do not see how Europe would benefit from being a superpower again.
      - happyscrappy 12y ago
        It would be pointless anyway because Europe is too important to US power to be trusted with their own defense.

jefstratiou 12y ago

Unfortunately for our good hero at the border, this mess all needs to be tested in the courts. He's just the prop for whatever organizations want to line up behind him. Just as the 'prosecutors' will be the prop for the actors lined up behind the definition of their current policies. See you in a decade when this all shakes out.

PeterWhittaker 12y ago

Interesting. I don't have a password. And I defy you to unlock my phone. The question is "Can I be forced to unlock my own phone? Under what circumstances? Under what circumstances can I be charged for refusing to do so?" If you haven't already guessed, I use a complex swipe pattern, one that uses all nine points and cannot be determined from reading the grease streaks, at least not easily. I know this because I moved to the current pattern after my daughter unlocked my phone by reading the grease streak. I changed the pattern and handed it back. It even used the previous pattern. She took one luck, uttered an obscenity, and handed back the phone. Can I be compelled to describe how to perform the swipe? To describe the pattern? To guide the agent? Interesting questions....

hnnewguy 12y ago
>Can I be compelled to describe how to perform the swipe? To describe the pattern? To guide the agent? Yes, yes and yes. Until there is legal precedent, if they want into your phone and you don't provide them access, you'll be in trouble. Any "cleverness" regarding a security code will likely make it worse.
- seanp2k2 12y ago
  And this is why deniable encryption is important: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption
patmcc 12y ago
A swipe pattern is no different than a password, either legally or practically speaking. It's just a nine digit number (with restrictions); the fact that it's swiped instead of entered is for ease of your own memory, nothing else.

cesarb 12y ago

Giving someone the password allows more than just looking around. Giving someone the password also allows them to modify the data on the device. Even if you "have nothing to hide", this is worrying. Who knows what has been changed on your device?

qu1mby 12y ago

Deplorable. Where notebooks are concerned, it reminds me of a TrueCrypt decoy password feature that would unlock a 'clean' hidden volume when entered in place of your 'working' volume password. Might be mistaken, though.

powertower 12y ago

Please look into the details of the court papers before making a judgement. I would say that at least 70-80% of these stories leave out very important details and contexts - to mold what happened to fit whatever narrative the spinners subscribe to. For example - The person could have been importing a large amount of goods with him that exceeded the value he stated. Once questioned about the disparity, he might have made statements about having the transactions documented in his phone. The boarder agents would then have asked to see those transactions. Or even said, "could you just turn on your phone, move the screen towards us, and show us (or just email it to us so we can print out and attach the record to your declaration)". I've looked into pretty much every major story, and once you get passed the superficial reporting, and into the actual details, it becomes depressingly clear that the media (at all levels and all sides) are just political (or ideological) organizations that filter, mold, and in a lot of cases make up, everything they put out.

tomek_zemla 12y ago
Actually majority of people searched going through borders turn out to be perfectly innocent... Which means that if the law does allow officers to search everybody's personal information on their electronic devices they can browse at will my personal communication every time I cross the border. One good thing about this story is that electronic device searches on Canadian borders are somewhat in the legal grey zone and this will force the courts to clarify the rules. And... allow public to voice their approval or disapproval of this ongoing practice.
- powertower 12y ago
  I don't think I was stating otherwise.

gnud 12y ago

At least with a password you can refuse. With a fingerprint it's very easy to actually force you to unlock your device.

userbinator 12y ago

I wonder if it would be considered even more suspicious to not carry any phones or other electronic devices at all across a border?

wongarsu 12y ago

Them being allowed to search my phone is one thing, but how is not unlocking it "obstructing border officials"? Where I come from (Europe), you aren't required by law to help police (or border officials). If they come with a warrant to search your house and your door is closed, you aren't allowed to obstruct them by barricading your door but you are not required to help them by opening your door either (be prepared to pay for your new door though). Is that different in Canada?

kazinator 12y ago

Since the digital storage of a phone cannot contain a firearm, explosive, blade, protected species of plant or animal, or a pork sausage, they have no goddamned business.

JohnTHaller 12y ago

We should frame this story with what the actual end result of 'unlocking your phone' is when discussing it. The government routinely claims that it is no different than asking a traveler to open a physical briefcase. It is very different. If you're treating the phone as a 'good' as indicated in the quotes on this story, you can inspect my phone as a good. You can look at the phone. You can xray it. You can open up the back cover to ensure it's a real battery inside and not something more sinister. All that would be fine and fall within what the law was intended for. What the government is actually asking you to do is unlock your digital key to your entire digital identity for them to do with as they wish. Your phone has direct access to all your email accounts, all your personal and work files within the cloud (Dropbox, Box, iCloud, Google Drive, etc), your entire address book, your chat history, all your personal photos, your private PGP you use to sign communications to prove they came from you, etc, etc. Asking to inspect your phone is fine. Asking to have complete access to your entire digital life, history, and identity is not. If I'm asked for the former, go ahead and inspect it, I put it through the scanner on every flight. If I'm asked for the latter, the answer will be no.

MichaelGG 12y ago
Right. No one needs to import data via physical presence, so customs simply doesn't need to inspect the data on devices. If someone wanted to bring contraband in, they simply can download it over the Internet, no customs searches needed. This is vastly different than physical goods inside boxes or briefcases, which all physically pass through the border in an inspectable manner.
- click170 12y ago
  I predict they will claim to be hunting for child pornography and similar contraband. Despite the argument being silly, as pointed out by yourself.
  - spacemanmatt 12y ago
    s/silly/cynical

towelguy 12y ago

Why is someone looking at your cellphone not in the same privacy level as someone reading your mail? Would customs officials ask to read your letters?

lasermike026 12y ago

This kind of thing is a big f'ing deal breaker.

joe_developer 12y ago

Idea: When you're traveling change your settings to load the grub shell -- they ask for the password and you can say, "There is no password. It's a Linux grub-shell, just type the commands you want the computer to execute."

tomek_zemla 12y ago

Here is an idea for workaround. Have two passwords. One normal, the other one wipes out the phone. Back up your device to the cloud before you travel. Hand it in with a good smile and bad password...

lxfontes 12y ago

relevant: http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/06/charge-your-phone-before-flying-tsa-will-now-block-dead-devices-at-some-airports/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/06/charge-your-phone-before-fl...

Absentinsomniac 12y ago

I hear they can even copy your whole drive and send the contents off for analysis: http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-u-s-border-a-constitution-free-zone-where-officials-can-grab-your-computer-and-copy-your-hard-drive http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-u-s-border-a-c...

quipp 12y ago

out of curiosity, I wonder what would happen if an app was made to lock the phone down for a period of time or some other future forward criteria. Can they charge you when you don't actually know the password.

dghughes 12y ago

This gives me an idea for an app to make for mobile phones. Leave the phone off or turn it off before you get to the airport Security line then when you turn it on the app auto-starts which makes the phone slowly boot. Then when the phone does finally boot it shows a fake screen showing "Installing update 1 of 44" and make it so it never ends. My password is my index finger I should change it to my middle finger, my password is written down and really complex I'd never be able to remember it without seeing it.