Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 248 posts

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#41

Post by ardy42 »

bpchaps wrote: post #39
bruceb wrote: post #22

The problem with Customs and Border Protection is the attitude. They do have a challenging job. 99%+ of travelers are legit and doing nothing nefarious. They have to pick out the ones who are not legit/up to no good. I have no problem with them asking questions of myself or other travelers, even a lot of questions. The problem is the attitude and abusive nature of their conduct. I have had this experience a couple ti…

Anecdote: About a year ago, I went through TSA and asked to opt out of the body scans in place of a pat down. Another agent on the side watched the whole thing and made kissing faces my way the whole time while making gay jokes. It was extremely belittling. Fuck TSA.

> Another agent on the side watched the whole thing and made kissing faces my way the whole time while making gay jokes.

They need badge numbers and names prominently displayed on their uniforms, written in inch-high characters.

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#42

Post by dylan604 »

flyinglizard wrote: post #30
ams6110 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

s/discouraged/prohibited/ if I'm not mistaken.

Only when they are outside a device. So checking in a laptop with a battery is fine, checking in only the battery is not. However last time I checked (few years ago) there was also a wattage limitation to that, batteries below 99watt/hour could be checked in. A phone battery is about 10watt/hour, laptop 100-200wh.

When checking in baggage at the ticketing line, there is a list of things you cannot check, and they also read out a line when they are "courtesy checking" your carry on when the bins are full. This list include "smart" luggage with li-po batteries, they cannot be checked without removing the battery. They include e-cigarettes, and all sorts of other much less than 98Wh batteries. The manufacturers of batteries for professional cameras make 98Wh batteries specifically so they can be brought onto a plane. These are meant to be carried on and are not allowed to be checked. I used to shoot a lot of VR using GoPros. The pelican case had four 6-camera rigs with a spare body per rig totaling 28 cameras with li-po batteries. We were not allowed to check them as instructed by the ticketing agent.

What do all of these anecdotal stories mean?

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#43

Post by chillacy »

rhizome wrote: post #33
gabrielmoshe wrote: post #3

This is certainly not the first article of its kind, and the legality of such action seems to be upheld in court (at least the use of search without a warrant at the border). So, the selfish question then is: How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches? Is there a way I can present my phone such that it drops into a mode that contains no data? Do I need to back my phone up before traveling, wipe it for the…

Don't use fingerprint or face unlock. Passcode/pattern only.

They’ll still detain you till you input your passcode. Or they’ll beat you with a rubber hose, if you’re in those parts of the world.

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#45

Post by petre »

danboarder wrote: post #6

Suggestion: for international travel, when possible stow your powered off phone in checked baggage, and bring a non-important factory-reset phone or tablet for entertainment or to connect to the cloud if needed for work etc. If needed keep your work files in a hidden folder on an SD card in your camera... lots of annoying but increasingly necessary workarounds to deal with the growth of authoritarian states.

Just make sure you phone's battery is dead. Then you won't be able to unlock it anyway.

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#46

Post by trevyn »

chillacy wrote: post #43
rhizome wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't use fingerprint or face unlock. Passcode/pattern only.

They’ll still detain you till you input your passcode. Or they’ll beat you with a rubber hose, if you’re in those parts of the world.

They can detain your phone, but if you're a US citizen, they can't detain you for very long.

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#47

Post by dzhiurgis »

chillacy wrote: post #43
rhizome wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't use fingerprint or face unlock. Passcode/pattern only.

They’ll still detain you till you input your passcode. Or they’ll beat you with a rubber hose, if you’re in those parts of the world.

> those parts of the world.

Somehow the only horror stories I read (or experience) is about US or five eyes (NZ being exception).

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#48

Post by fwn »

User23 wrote: post #17
way2983 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So, the selfish question then is: How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches? Is there a way I can present my phone such that it drops into a mode that contains no data? Do I need to back my phone up before traveling, wipe it for the border crossing, and then restore once I feel safe? Save your encrypted system configuration/data on a service. Leave all your devices behind. Buy new devices on the other s…

Until a court rules that they can ask for your encrypted remote backup because reasons. And then hold you in contempt until you comply. This isn’t a technical problem, it’s a political one, which means it demands a political solution.

Grand-parents question

> How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches

knows plenty of technical solutions.

The question which needs to be answered in political terms is about the conditions under which it is lawful to put pressure on individuals to warrant such a search.

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#49

Post by jeauxlb »

gammateam wrote: post #28

So did anybody call a lawyer like he asked? Reminds me of the movie Trading Places where Eddie Murphy asked for a lawyer and all of the aristocrats coughed and turned away My rehearsed line is “you in the I’ll split the settlement with you if you record this and call a lawyer!” Gotta disrupt the bystander syndrome by calling out a particular person And provide the financial incentive

How would this even work? I google for local "immigration lawyers"(??) and tell the person who answers a man whose name I don't know yelled at me to call them, and that they get someone down to the airport? I'd like to think if I saw this happening I'd step in to help, but I don't feel like I would have enough compelling --- let alone actionable --- information for a lawyer to be interested enough to intervene.

Re: Man sues feds after being detained for refusing to unlock his phone at airport

#50

Post by h0l0cube »

peterwwillis wrote: post #40
gabrielmoshe wrote: post #3

This is certainly not the first article of its kind, and the legality of such action seems to be upheld in court (at least the use of search without a warrant at the border). So, the selfish question then is: How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches? Is there a way I can present my phone such that it drops into a mode that contains no data? Do I need to back my phone up before traveling, wipe it for the…

Most Americans don't protect their data, because most Americans aren't potentially going to be set up by their government to be made to look like some kind of terrorist. If you happen to be non-white or non-christian or have such as family or who live in a majority Muslim country, then you probably do want to protect yourself against this eventuality. In that case, either bring a dumb/brick phone for them to search,…

A 'blame the victim' mentality gives breathing space to the bully. 'Blame the bully' and at least they might apply some discretion, to counter negative attention to themselves or their superiors. Enforcement jobs, including border patrol, can self-select for sadists and racists, so it's probably best the public remains vigilant to the prospect of their increasing power.
Post reply on HN