> No, it won't technically stop them from installing a backdoor on your laptop, but I think you're kind of shifting goalposts with that argument. We're talking

> No, it won't technically stop them from installing a backdoor on your laptop, but I think you're kind of shifting goalposts with that argument. We're talking about warrants to decrypt data here. That backdoor can then be used to acquire my encryption key and decrypt my data, so I think it's still entirely relevant. Less relevant but still entirely reasonable is my concern that compromising hardware during a border crossing should be considered even remotely acceptable! > It's the difference between a 4th Amendment issue and a 5th Amendment issue. Whether or not the police could search your phone used to fall squarely within the bounds of the 4th Amendment. If you encrypted it yourself, it would then be a 5th Amendment issue - you have a right to not self-incriminate. I don't think the main change between old phones which could be searched under the 4th amendment and new phones which cannot is encryption. The main change is that an old phone used to be a relatively impersonal tool akin to a car or gun, while a new phone holds an incredible amount of intensely personal information about a person. Seizing an old phone was no big deal; it would be as if the police wanted to seize the spade in my garage. Go for it. Use it to eliminate me from your investigations. Seizing a new phone, however, gives many of my intimate secrets to LEOs who are probably taking a hostile, confrontational stance towards me. It also gives those people an enormous amount of power over me. They now have access to my email accounts, forum accounts, personal contacts etc and could easily impersonate me or blackmail me. In theory they shouldn't take advantage of that power but I have no doubt that they would do so anyway, in some cases at least. The reason I mentioned mind-reading (how do I say that without sounding like a kook?) is that it illustrates that point with a bit more impact. At some point it will become possible, and probably even desirable under the right circumstances, but the potential for abuse is enormous and it will need to be governed under far stronger laws than anybody is currently protected by. The 5th amendment might be adequate if it can be used to simply outlaw the practice, but I doubt that will happen. So how do you control what personal data LEOs have access to? And this exact problem exists right now with your smart phone, albeit to a lesser extent. Another way of putting it would be: LEOs can currently request a warrant for particular searches - phone tap, call records, physical property at a specific address etc. But if they get one that covers "smartphone" (or, later, memories), that basically gives them access to everything, almost all of which will be quite personal and entirely unrelated to the case. So how do you control what they get access to? Right now, the most secure option is to never record anything personal on any device, but that's harder said than done (and nobody on HN has achieved it!). Another option is to encrypt anything you consider private, and hope that your hardware or encryption scheme hasn't already been broken.