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

Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#661

Post by krispyfi »

gpt5 wrote: post #657
gslepak wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out there already is a legal precedent for this. It's called the 4th Amendment: > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seiz…

I'm sorry, but the Fourth Amendment does not protect against the intentional destruction of evidence. He could have refused search without a warrant, intentionally destroying evidence is a different legal matter.

So if you really want to nab someone but you don't care what the charge is, you can threaten them with a 4th Amendment-violating search, which induces them to destroy evidence. Pretty neat trick. IANAL, but I don't think it's controversial to say that people who treat the Bill of Rights like an obstacle to be hacked around probably shouldn't be in positions of power.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#662

Post by ux266478 »

Cider9986 wrote: post #560
gblargg wrote: post #531

The decoy passcode feature should boot into a separate partition that looks like a normal phone setup, and during that time quietly erase the user's actual data. They would never have known if it worked like this.

Not physically possible[1] to be deniable and a bad[2] idea. [1] https://veracrypt.io/en/Wear-Leveling.html https://veracrypt.io/en/Trim%20Operation.html [2] https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2082153517234676150#m

I think you are vastly overestimating the amount of analysis that border guards are capable of.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#663

Post by kioleanu »

kelnos wrote: post #327
kioleanu wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am currently in Italy (just passing through) and was able to open the archive link with the article

If you're using roaming on your cellular plan, all your traffic is routed over VPN to your home country, so local blocks don't work. (That's one of the reasons why it's trivially easy for foreign visitors to China to bypass the Great Firewall.) If you were on wifi, that's notably interesting.

I was on the resort’s WiFi, no vpn. What is strange maybe is that if I search my outgoing ip address, the resort is listed as the ISP

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#664

Post by kaliqt »

cute_boi wrote: post #654
gslepak wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out there already is a legal precedent for this. It's called the 4th Amendment: > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seiz…

I assumed all these amendment don't apply at border.

The amendment applies at the border. The agents are acting unlawfully.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#665

Post by [deleted] »

tiahura wrote: post #393
btbuildem wrote: post #227

The naivete of some of the comments here is astounding. It doesn't matter whether you're right, it doesn't matter whether it's the law, it's irrelevant that you have rights, etc. Those things are of the past now, for the US. I think it would be easier to understand the playing field and choose your actions accordingly, if you accept the US has entered its East Germany / late 20th century Soviet era -- except of cours…

In law school we skipped border search cases because the border crosser cases can basically be summed up with “you have no right to privacy at the border.” This has been the common law for 5000 years. It has nothing to do with Trump, or cell phones, or anything other than the notion that a sovereign has an absolute right to know what is crossing its borders.

[deleted]

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#666

Post by jimbob45 »

platevoltage wrote: post #540
jimbob45 wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the Chinese who use NK slave labor at their logging camps near the NK border? Is that the China that is more free?

SO you have an issue with prison labor? As an American?

Prison labor and slavery are two separate concepts. You’d never accuse the ancestors of a black person of being “prison laborers”.

What is happening in China is bona fide slavery and it’s telling that your response comes back almost like clockwork whenever it’s brought up on this or any website.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#667

Post by Taek »

Animats wrote: post #659

Legal question: if you had whole-disk encryption, and the duress password just zeroized the decryption key, would that be "destroying evidence?" Especially if there was a recovery possible but not instantly available, such as a Yubikey in a safe deposit box in a bank. That would take a subpoena to get, and there is an opportunity to challenge the subpoena in court first. Not instantly at the border. Something like th…

I do like the idea of forcing due process to access an encryption key. I'm not sure if that idea is compatible with current law, but it seems just at the very least.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#668

Post by [deleted] »

tiahura wrote: post #393
btbuildem wrote: post #227

The naivete of some of the comments here is astounding. It doesn't matter whether you're right, it doesn't matter whether it's the law, it's irrelevant that you have rights, etc. Those things are of the past now, for the US. I think it would be easier to understand the playing field and choose your actions accordingly, if you accept the US has entered its East Germany / late 20th century Soviet era -- except of cours…

In law school we skipped border search cases because the border crosser cases can basically be summed up with “you have no right to privacy at the border.” This has been the common law for 5000 years. It has nothing to do with Trump, or cell phones, or anything other than the notion that a sovereign has an absolute right to know what is crossing its borders.

[deleted]

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#669

Post by Taek »

gblargg wrote: post #531

The decoy passcode feature should boot into a separate partition that looks like a normal phone setup, and during that time quietly erase the user's actual data. They would never have known if it worked like this.

Definitely booting into a decoy system beats an automatic wipe.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#670

Post by xhhrudjjxud »

gpt5 wrote: post #657
gslepak wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out there already is a legal precedent for this. It's called the 4th Amendment: > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seiz…

I'm sorry, but the Fourth Amendment does not protect against the intentional destruction of evidence. He could have refused search without a warrant, intentionally destroying evidence is a different legal matter.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN