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

CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

cbp.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 142 posts

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#81

Post by smdyc1 »

jscho wrote: post #73
866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've binge watched enough Australian Border Patrol videos to know that: 1. You don't fuck around with Australian customs agents. Ever. 2. They make every other country look like complete lightweights, Americans and EU included. These guys will fine you AU $500 for half an eaten apple in your bag.

They're fined because they lied on their declaration forms. Our customs agents are generally pretty fair and reasonable, but they do take their jobs very seriously. Tip for travelers to Australia/New Zealand: If you have something that is stated on the declaration form, just answer yes. Provided it's not some totally illegal substance, they'll inspect the items and if it's not allowed past the border it'll be seized…

Yes, it's a basic function of any customs and quarantine organisation. Australian Border Force don't care if you have memes mocking our PM or DJT. Inspection of electronic devices only happens when there's evidence of a crime.

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#83

Post by paulsen »

gruez wrote: post #40
chasd00 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to China means your devices are owned when the plane touches down if not before. That’s why you bring a burner device (including laptop and anything else), never log into anything, and throw it in the trash when you leave.

>Going to China means your devices are owned when the plane touches down if not before. ??? Are American made operating systems (Android, iOS, Windows, Mac) so full of 0days that the Chinese are burning them on random travelers? This just feels like either severe paranoia and/or chinese/american psyop, making people think that China has some magic hacking power.

I wouldn't say your devices are owned, but you should expect being monitored and your communications being recorded.

You could make an argument about the security of the modem of your devices, as that was often a target due to it not being particularly secure and it having wide access to your device, but I believe that started changing some years ago when this started being a more widely reported issue.

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#85

Post by tptacek »

LocalH wrote: post #74
tptacek wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false. It's an old fundraising claim used by the ACLU; they have since set up pages backing away from it (because convincing people in the US that they don't have rights they do in fact have is not good civil liberties advocacy). There's direct SCOTUS precedent on this. There's a 100 air mile border definition that's material to immigration enforcement (with complicated limitations). It does not determine whe…

Congress's own website with a map showing the exception area seems to indicate that nearly the entire state of Hawaiʻi is within the exception zone.

"The exception zone" is a myth.

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#86

Post by [deleted] »

smdyc1 wrote: post #81
jscho wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're fined because they lied on their declaration forms. Our customs agents are generally pretty fair and reasonable, but they do take their jobs very seriously. Tip for travelers to Australia/New Zealand: If you have something that is stated on the declaration form, just answer yes. Provided it's not some totally illegal substance, they'll inspect the items and if it's not allowed past the border it'll be seized…

Yes, it's a basic function of any customs and quarantine organisation. Australian Border Force don't care if you have memes mocking our PM or DJT. Inspection of electronic devices only happens when there's evidence of a crime.

[deleted]

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#87

Post by LocalH »

tptacek wrote: post #85
LocalH wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress's own website with a map showing the exception area seems to indicate that nearly the entire state of Hawaiʻi is within the exception zone.

"The exception zone" is a myth.

Tell that to the US Government:

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46601

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#88

Post by maerF0x0 »

geekone wrote: post #13
userbinator wrote: post #6

The legalese is thick but this is a notable point I saw from a quick skim: 5.3.2 "Passcodes or other means of access may not be utilized to access information that is only stored remotely."

looks like they can request your passcode to unlock the phone so anything local and/or cached before they disable network connectivity would be there.

This is an element of 1Password's travel mode, if i understand it correctly...

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#89

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

huslage wrote: post #48
dylan604 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device, which is why I always powered mined down before crossing. Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an interview, they could just deny your visa and your entry into the US. If you're a citizen, they can't deny your re-entry. They can delay…

It ONLY applies to citizens. The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices. All bets are off for non-citizens, sadly.

Actually, I'm not sure they can compel non-citizens. If you want in, you might have to give them the keys. But if you would rather not enter, would they compel on pain of imprisonment?

The U.S. isn't China or the UK.

Re: CBP Directive 3340-049B: Border Search of Electronic Devices

#90

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

chrsstrm wrote: post #16

This directive was issued in January of this year, what is relevance of being posted today? I love all the instances where it says, we will not do this or infringe in this way... unless it is a matter of national security, which we don't have to disclose to you. So basically, do what you want as long as you write it up properly. And this part: 5.3 Review and Handling of Passcode-Protected or Encrypted Information 5.3…

They can't compel you to decrypt anything, and powering down is a good idea.

There are consequences for not decrypting, though: for a U.S. citizen, they can seize your stuff for up to 5 days. For non-citizens, they can elect to not let you in.

Concerning "obligated", I would point out that regulations aren't laws. Governing bodies can say whatever they want, but that doesn't make it so. For instance, the TSA continues to publicly insist that ID (especially "Real" ID) is required to fly within the U.S., but it's not.

Post reply on HN