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

Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 224 posts

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#171

Post by cpncrunch »

Canada wrote: post #160
cpncrunch wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a "bullshit excuse" if they do actually manage to catch many people by searching phones?

The fact of the matter is they don't. What they want to do is go fishing through your papers and they cynically use this catch all excuse when challenged. In Canada it isn't legal to arbitrarily search people even at the border. Reasonable cause is necessary: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-52.6/page-64.html#... There is both plenty of incentive and no consequences for conducting unlawful searches.

>The fact of the matter is they don't

Do you have any references for that?

From what I can see on programmes like Border Security, they do catch a lot of people this way, and they do always have reasonable grounds for the search.

Also, how does that law allow random searches at airports (which are presumably legal)? Is there another law which permits those?

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#172

Post by hackmiester »

fallat wrote: post #145
JohnTHaller wrote: post #124

We should frame this story with what the actual end result of 'unlocking your phone' is when discussing it. The government routinely claims that it is no different than asking a traveler to open a physical briefcase. It is very different. If you're treating the phone as a 'good' as indicated in the quotes on this story, you can inspect my phone as a good. You can look at the phone. You can xray it. You can open up th…

This is why I don't carry a smart phone. I carry a shit, call and SMS only phone.

Even with the worst phone you can buy from most carriers, these would still apply: "your entire address book, your chat history, all your personal photos"

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#173

Post by manicdee »

kazinator wrote: post #103
jackweirdy wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China too - a friend’s dad works in chip manufacture & flies regularly from the UK to China - he leaves his personal phone at home and gets issued a new phone by his company every time he goes, which is wiped when he returns.

And now consider the bitter irony of your "China too".

I am not sure I understand the irony of comparing China to an authoritarian state.

ELI5?

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#174

Post by [deleted] »

cpncrunch wrote: post #20
andrewchambers wrote: post #2

There is no reason anyone should search a phone, because anyone smuggling "illegal data" can just transfer it directly over the internet undetected. This is horrible and ridiculous.

You could, but if you watch some episodes of "border security" you'll see that they catch people doing illegal stuff all the time by searching their phones. Usually it's illegally working (which obviously wouldn't apply in this case). However they also are looking for child porn, which may be been why they wanted to search this guy's phone.

[deleted]

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#175

Post by giarc »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #124

We should frame this story with what the actual end result of 'unlocking your phone' is when discussing it. The government routinely claims that it is no different than asking a traveler to open a physical briefcase. It is very different. If you're treating the phone as a 'good' as indicated in the quotes on this story, you can inspect my phone as a good. You can look at the phone. You can xray it. You can open up th…

The show Border Security has a case like this on pretty much every episode. It shows the officer going through a persons text messages and they usually find that either the person sells drugs, or that they intend to work illegally in the country. I've always wondered if the persons phone wasn't locked, or if they willingly gave up their passcode.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#176

Post by giarc »

DannyBee wrote: post #131
akamaka wrote: post #22

Here's the section of the law that he was charged under: False statements, evasion of duties 153. No person shall (b) to avoid compliance with this Act or the regulations, (i) destroy, alter, mutilate, secrete or dispose of records or books of account, (ii) make, or participate in, assent to or acquiesce in the making of, false or deceptive entries in records or books of account, or (iii) omit, or participate in, ass…

I"m a US lawyer, and uh, this looks remarkably weak of a charge unless their is some canadian precedent somewhere that says "records or books of account" covers "random shit on non-business phone"

I believe I read that this type of case has not been tested in Canadian courts yet.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#177

Post by bigiain »

MichaelGG wrote: post #146
bigiain wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time again to remind people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc "Don't talk to Police"

While good overall advice, I understand that those protections do not cover you at the border. As an American entering the US, yes you just need to provide a customs declaration. As a non-US person, it's not clear what rights you have. They certainly don't need to permit you entry.

Sure. It's certainly more complicated at borders (or, in the US "border zone" https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights-governments-100-mile-b... ), especially for us non-US citizens, but the underlying sentiment still holds.

The other guy does not have your interests in mind. He knows the rules better than you, and knows which rules you probably don't know and what he will get away with when bending the rules. He's probably not specifically out to get _you_, but he's definitely being measured on his "performance" by whoever pays him, and that means he's highly motivated to "get" enough people, whether or not it's deserved. Anything you say is less likely to convince him of your innocence than it is likely to give him more ammunition to use against you.

Make both of your lives easier - firstly don't do anything wrong, secondly answer any questions he has with the briefest possible truthful and polite/respectful answer. You'll get waved through, and he'll move on to the next talkative and/or disrespectful person and give them a hard time. (For those of us who aren't US citizens, remember it _is_ a privilege to be permitted to visit, a privilege the possibly minimum-wage customs/immigration/border people on the ground have the authority to revoke.)

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#178

Post by Zigurd »

vacri wrote: post #112
Zigurd wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many parts of the world had not formed into modern nations states 300 years ago. Surely there was the rule of law in many places without the current idea of nations. There is no a priori reason the current political organization of people is eternal, or even very durable.

By 'not durable', do you mean 'the concept stretches as far back as we have written records'? Yes, 'nations' meaning 'something that gives you a passport' haven't been around long, but 'nations' meaning 'geopolitical entities' is as old as record-keeping itself. And what do you mean by 'rule of law'? Do the decisions of tribal elders count? That doesn't suggest consistency, which is the spirit of the term.

City-states are not comparable to modern nations in their scope, budget, police powers, military powers, surveillance powers, etc. A return to smaller political units that don't have the resources to mount, for example, pervasive surveillance and large-scale incarceration might make us freer than we are now.

In other words, maybe national politics needs to be refactored into smaller units to be more tractable and maintainable.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#179

Post by bigiain »

jackweirdy wrote: post #71
grecy wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you can do that, and many business people now do exactly that when flying in/out of the US knowing that any data they carry across the US border is fair game.

China too - a friend’s dad works in chip manufacture & flies regularly from the UK to China - he leaves his personal phone at home and gets issued a new phone by his company every time he goes, which is wiped when he returns.

I know a few people who've worked at (different) places which have a rule that says "any hardware you've taken to China is never allowed on the corporate network again". They get "burner" laptops and phones before leaving, and dispose of them when they come home (usually by giving them to family/friends or selling them on eBay).

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#180

Post by bigiain »

csense wrote: post #162
allendoerfer wrote: post #56

As a European I have to say, that I associate these sort of things with totalitarian regimes and it is just unimaginable for me why the American society tolerates this while fighting for democracy elsewhere.

If you have nothing to hide, then invasive surveillance doesn't hurt you. If the alternative to invasive surveillance is terrorists flying planes into our buildings and killing thousands of innocent people, then a little extra hassle at the airport is a small price to pay. That's how most people think. Finding the incorrect implicit assumptions made by these arguments is left as an exercise to the reader.

"If you have nothing to hide, then invasive surveillance doesn't hurt you."

Easily countered with "So what's your email account and password?".

(I love watching the logical contortions that come out next "Well I didn't mean _I've_ got nothing to hide! Or I didn't mean I don't have the right to hide it from _you_ Or or or... Think of the _chiiiiiildren!!! You're probably a terrorist!")

Post reply on HN