New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine • Hacker News Board

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#411

Post by wang_li » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:06 PM UTC

jrace wrote: post #174

WaylonKenning wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Riddle me this - what is the alternative? Don't look at a phone? Why do we look inside suitcases? Why have the concept of customs? We search things across borders for things our country does not want. We don't want drugs. We don't want fresh fruit (which will trip up more people than drugs). We don't want child porn. And if a phone is a container for that content, we want to be able to explore the container. Of cours…

I get your point....but a similar and more worrying thing is happening at the Canadian/US border right now. Entry to the US can be denied (for life even) if the customs agent suspects the traveler has involvement with Cannabis. That includes having investments in Cannabis companies. So if the take my phone and find any information on it connected to Cannabis I could be barred FOR LIFE from entry into the US. That mea…

This is kind of thing is not new. Canada doesn't let people with DUIs enter the country. They also inspect electronics and have for a number of years.

And marijuana is not legal anywhere in the US at the moment. There are simply some states that don't have state level criminal laws associated with marijuana.

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#412

Post by TomK32 » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:07 PM UTC

yholio wrote: post #275

bitwize wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you pull this stunt in the USA, I hope you enjoy your five-year sentence in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison and the effect that the permanent felony conviction on your record will have on your employment prospects and the exercise of your civil rights. Misleading, or concealing information from, a federal agent is a felony.

> If you pull this stunt in the USA, I hope you enjoy your five-year sentence in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison and the effect that the permanent felony conviction on your record will have on your employment prospects and the exercise of your civil rights. Misleading, or concealing information from, a federal agent is a felony. If this is the line of the argument, then why is the search done at all? I am perfectl…

you say nothing to that agent. not a word. you give them your password if the insist and that's it.

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#413

Post by newscracker » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:07 PM UTC

wild_preference wrote: post #257

Happened to a female friend flying from Toronto to visit me in Mexico. Because she had a connecting flight in US, a US agent went through her phone. (Classic mistake of entering the US unless absolutely neccessary) Guy was reading her Tinder messages and accusing her of being a prostitute. He brought up some saucy messages and would say things like “girls don’t do this kind of stuff for free...” Finally handed her ba…

This is so disgusting, and is a personal violation! I can't imagine going through such a horrific experience. This is exactly the behavior that such laws bring forth. See an attractive woman and stop her for questioning, knowing fully well that you're in the position of power between the two of you and can get away with almost anything.

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#414

Post by dalore » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:08 PM UTC

mark212 wrote: post #348

m_eiman wrote: post #305

Wouldn't it be possible to conveniently hide your usual filesystem from the border officers by using the new APFS shared-filesystems-in-single-container feature, without having to pre-allocate and waste space for an additional hidden data partition? Just install macOS like you normally do, set it up with a user and some basic data. Then create a new partition in the same container and install what you normally use (o…

very clever and it would almost certainly work. But what do you do for your phone?

Backup your phone to the cloud, factory reset. Restore when you get to the destination.

A bit of a hassle, and after you restore to factory reset you will need to add the basic contacts, info if you need for travelling. And any messages/updates on the phone in the meantime will be lost when you restore from backup.

Will need to download the backup so most likely need a good wifi connection. Or you could save it to your laptop in that aforementioned hidden partition. You could do it on the plane so the window of using factory reset would be short. And restore just after customs.

Is there a better idea?

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#415

Post by mattnewton » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:11 PM UTC

kadendogthing wrote: post #334

mattnewton wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically I don’t think that this logically extends from suitcases to full phone access in the same way I don’t think that the right to bear arms allows you to train and arm a private army with tanks and fighter jets. At some point, it stops being a logical extension of a rule and starts being of a different kind due to changes in magnitude. Here, a country may be concerned about objects being physically brought into…

>Basically I don’t think that this logically extends from suitcases to full phone access I get that you don't think that is the case, but you're not really explaining why you believe so. > but to be concerned about a persons digital life is a concern of a different kind But as I said, they're just inspecting the same thing they've always been inspecting. The medium is different and it incidentally happens to be house…

Let’s for the sake of argument assume that the governments stated reasons are what they are going after. Is the off chance that someone carries objectionable pornography, designs for nuclear or chemical weapons on their personal phone (instead of emailing them encrypted, or following the state’s own guidelines on how to avoid being searched) worth the ability to search everyone’s personal phone without some kind of judicial oversight? How many people are estimated to be doing so? How many people did they used to catch via the old papers method but cannot anymore? The burden of proof should be on the state who wants to infringe on the privacy of travelers.

I mean, to me the fact that they acknowledge that anyone serious about privacy can take measures to circumvent it pretty much blows the story that this will be effective at catching people smuggling weapons designs or other serious crimes out of the water.

>This analogy in no way is relevant to data organization and transmission. It's pretty hyperbolic and distracts from any point you are trying to make.

I’m trying to make the case that clearly magnitude affects whether or not something is a reasonable extension, perhaps poorly. But you’ll surely concede that doing something at increased scale often changes the nature of that thing? And that’s what I’m saying here, you aren’t just giving away what would have been in your suitcase, you are giving away the keys to your house, car, mailbox, safety deposit box, diary and family photo album. That means it changes the nature of the request, and can’t be considered along the same lines as a suitcase.

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#416

Post by Skrillex » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:11 PM UTC

tobib wrote: post #387

jliptzin wrote: post #233

This happened to me driving from the US into Canada with my significant other on a short vacation. After some routine questioning, the agent asked for our phones and passwords. Naturally, I hesitated and wanted to know why he needed to go through our phones. He didn't give a reason, but said if I refuse they'd hold us until their forensics team cracks the phone password anyway. I wanted to make a bigger deal about it…

> He didn't give a reason, but said if I refuse they'd hold us until their forensics team cracks the phone password anyway Is that realistic? Would they actually be able to "crack" the encryption of a modern iPhone or Android phone?

I too am incredulous of that claim. Most likely it was meant to scare the uninformed (and also the informed, since they do not want to waste the time).

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#417

Post by pavel_lishin » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:12 PM UTC

keyme wrote: post #365

pavel_lishin wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread. And anyway, my understanding is that if you're rich enough to charter a private jet, or to own one, you skip a lot of the border formalities.

No you don't... It's just another agent. Granted, this one sees very little traffic each day, so probably less inclined to annoy you out of spite. Perhaps if you carry a diplomatic passport, that's a different story altogether.

I'm sure that agent feels empowered to call people coming off private jets a slut after demanding to examine their Tinder history.

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#418

Post by paavoova » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:14 PM UTC

yholio wrote: post #85

This is an important issue cryptographers and security minded people often overlook: the strongest cryptography is irrelevant if it opens you to such social harassment. What we need is practical cryptography. I have found practical success by booting from an encrypted Linux partition that has absolutely nothing relevant on it, with a weak password I can always enter when requested by big guys with guns. Unbeknown to…

Note that this requires using dm-crypt in plain mode, which allows only one passphrase, doesn't perform any passphrase mangling or salting, and performs no passphrase checking on decryption. It requires one to re-enter exact parameters, and an improper passphrase will happily give bunk data.

Secondly, high-entropy data is evident at even a courtesy glance - normal computer and filesystem operations do not produce high-entropy data on disk, therefore a large portion of high-entropy disk data is highly suspect. The author discusses this in detail in sections 2.4 and 5.2 of https://gitlab.com/cryptsetup/cryptsetup/wikis/FrequentlyAsk...

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#419

Post by refurb » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:14 PM UTC

jrace wrote: post #370

elhudy wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I drove from Detroit to Toronto via Windsor, and was subjected to a vehicle search and questioning. I pulled up my hotel reservation at the agents' request, and he snatched my phone out of my hands and started going through my emails. He couldn't wrap his head around why anyone would want to take a roadtrip to toronto for an extended weekend, other than to run drugs. I've also been interrogated when flying into Canad…

Try being a Canadian and going the other way!

As a Canadian who has gone both ways dozens of times, I’ve definitely gotten a much tougher treatment by the Canadian side.

I had to bite my tongue to not say “I’m a citizen, you have to let me in.”

Re: New Zealand travellers refusing digital search now face $5k Customs fine

#420

Post by john_kuszmaul » Mon, Oct 01, 2018, 6:16 PM UTC

trhway wrote: post #401

mavdi wrote: post #392

We immediately need a phone and laptop feature called "Border crossing mode". Once you can perhaps active anytime but only gets deactivated once you're physically in a predefined location.

that mode should be almost always on - the CBP in US can do all that fun stuff to you at any time as long as you're closer than 100 miles to any US border - including ocean. So, for example, CBP can do anything they want to anybody in San Francisco. Granted, for now they do that mostly to "brown" people - well they need to start somewhere to get us into that shiny totalitarian future and of course the start is always…

Perhaps that mode could be called full disk encryption?

All humans inside the US border have the fifth amendment right to remain silent, so handing over encryption passwords to the CBP is a choice.

Unfortunately, the 5th amendment doesn't apply in New Zealand - if you remain silent at a NZ airport while customs ask for your password, they will impose a $5000 fine on you. The only viable solution I see is to only travel to places that do have 5th amendment protection or similar (which would immediately rule out Britain, Ireland, Australia, and now NZ as well).