Remember the 5th Amendment applies to passwords. No law enforcement officer may EVER compel you to log in to a device with a password / pass code / unlock pattern, for any reason.
In other words, don't enable touch id or face unlock.
Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
91–100 of 212 posts
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can move, but not necessarily in car. Or on a plane. And you can't walk on the highways or near the rail road tracks or in the road. And you will be stopped if an officer sees you walking alone on a country road. And that's probable cause right there. Don't go wandering in the woods, lots of privately owned property there as well. I'm sorry, you said something about moving?
I don't think they can stop you from moving in a car. They can stop you from driving one, though...
Yes you can pre-arrange a ride. Hitch-hiking is illegal in some states. You can pay for a taxi, buy a train or plane ticket. The latter provided you are not on any lists and don't mind your things being x-rayed and/or searched.
Really paying for rides in a car is the last great bastion of free movement (provided you don't get randomly stopped and searched in a checkpoint of some kind) in the U.S. Although, most of those either won't take you on the highway or are prohibitively expensive to do so. Making inter-city and greater travel difficult. But bonus points if you can pay with cash.
I understand, though. There are just so many common sense reasons to restrict free travel. How could one resist?
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#93It's possible the TSA will claim that taking a device for some amount of time and giving it back doesn't qualify as a (4th amendment) search. However, from a security perspective it would be awful if they could disappear with your device whenever they wanted - that certainly makes me uncomfortable.
>> It's possible the TSA will claim that taking a device for some amount of time and giving it back doesn't qualify as a (4th amendment) search. Not likely to work: "We just want to search your house for 30 minutes" or "you can have your document back after we photocopy it, so no warrant needed." The idea is that they cannot do certain things without a warrant.
I think the fear is that the TSA will deny having searched the phone and the complaintant will have not way of proving that they did.
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Presumably, air travel is a privilege, not a right, just like driving a car is. Freedom of movement is a privilege, not a right? What can you possibly be talking about? Did I miss a memo? The United States (and other common law societies) have a long history of enshrining freedom of movement as a fundamental right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit... Also, be reminded that the USA voted…
Freedom of movement no more guarantees your right to purchase a ticket aboard a private, commercial flight, than freedom of speech guarantees your right to post to a private, commercial forum. What freedom of movement does guarantee, to be clear, is that you're: 1. allowed to own your own plane; 4. allowed to fly said plane over pretty much any American airspace, other than specific little zones cordoned off by the m…
You cannot buy a plane and fly it without first asking the government.
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
hidden partitions, and/or storing all your important data off-device are the two pieces of advice that get suggested the most.
Presumably whatever forensic tools they have will easily detect hidden partitions. The advice I hear for international travelers is disk encryption + FedEx'ing your laptop to its destination.
> easily detect hidden partitions.
Even hidden volumes in encrypted partitions? Has that feature of VeraCrypt been cracked?
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#96Remember the 5th Amendment applies to passwords. No law enforcement officer may EVER compel you to log in to a device with a password / pass code / unlock pattern, for any reason.
In other words, don't enable touch id or face unlock.
on iOS anyway, you can enable face id/touch id but specifically disable it from being able to log into the phone with it. You can then use face/touch id for authentication in apps.
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#97It's possible the TSA will claim that taking a device for some amount of time and giving it back doesn't qualify as a (4th amendment) search. However, from a security perspective it would be awful if they could disappear with your device whenever they wanted - that certainly makes me uncomfortable.
>It's possible the TSA will claim that taking a device for some amount of time and giving it back doesn't qualify as a (4th amendment) search. I wonder how long it would take to clone a phone and give back a ringer with some extra software installed. It's not like most people know the serial number of their phone. And if the phone's in a case, then put the ringer in the target phones case, and it has the same look an…
What about authentication details held in the "secure enclave", or equivalent? If they can unlock my phone, I think it would be faster and easier to just install their "extra software", rather than the technical difficulties involved in transparently replacing the hardware with a new copy of the same thing.
Especially if I've got a semi-obscure phone in an unpopular color. That's at the level of a targeted attack against an individual.
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#98I am TOTALLY ok with TSA reading my last text messages before I go on a flight. Those last few texts someone sends before committing a terrorist action, could send an extremely strong signal to authorities and possibly prevent a disaster. If the extra security results in a strange TSA agent getting to enjoy some surprise dick pics, well that's the price of freedom Jerry.
>I am TOTALLY ok with TSA reading my last text messages before I go on a flight.
That's cool, and I respect that. But I am NOT OK with the TSA performing such a search of my devices. (Unless they have a warrant. Then I'm fine with it. It's really that I'm a stickler about this old document called the "Constitution")
Are you willing to stand up for MY right for my (electronic) papers and effects to be secure from unreasonable searches? If not, are there other parts of the Constitution you would be willing to jettison?
(For what it's worth, this is a genuine question not just a complaint. There are parts of the Constitution that I would prefer to change -- just not this particular one.)
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#99I guess they didn't read Riley v California[1]. In the opinion of the SCOTUS:
> Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans “the privacies of life". The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought. Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple -- get a warrant.
Given that the SCOTUS unanimously ruled searching a phone without a warrant is unconstitutional incident to an arrest, the same requirement must also hold for Terry stops and simple safety inspections.
Re: Questions for TSA after reports of laptop and phone searches on domestic flights
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, are you equating needless bureaucratic red tape in a non-profit's application for tax-exempt status to the seizure of a private citizen's phone and laptop?
Sorry, are you equating a private citizen having their phone out of their sight for 10 minutes with over a year of delays in permitting an organization to accept tax-exempt donations from thousands of citizens? Frankly, BOTH are unreasonable and the government should not be engaging in EITHER ONE. I think there is little to be gained by debating which is "worse" -- could we instead agree to cease doing both?
No. There are degrees of "worseness": we have a priority queue of issues that must be addressed given spare time and resources.
In that context: and individual's right to privacy and to be left alone is much much more important than any organization getting tax exempt status.