New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices • Hacker News Board

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#271

Post by smcl » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 9:34 PM UTC

throwaway7312 wrote: post #260

smcl wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I'm just gonna skip the USA altogether for holidays and work - the world is pretty huge and full of interesting places. I know it's not an option for US citizens and it's a shame for the rest of us but I've decided it's not worth it.

US citizen here. Haven't visited the US in years. Myriad reasons why, but the CBP policy is part of it. Just don't like the idea of people demanding I let them go through my stuff, but also don't like the idea of sitting around for 8 or 9 hours or having my machine confiscated if I won't give up the password, either. I should also note that at least as a US citizen, having traveled through some 40 or so different cou…

I’ve heard Canada was bad from a few different people, that’s so surprising!

Czech Republic is an odd one, I’ve not had any problems personally and I’ve flown in and out of Brno and Prague a few times (though I prefer Vienna). Mind sharing what happened, purely to satisfy my curiosity? I had a weird issue when one customs guy was trying to tell me that I reported my passport missing a year prior, and he got extremely frustrated that I couldn’t understand what everything was saying. Nothing came of it, it was just a few confusing minutes with an obviously flustered person who was refusing to believe my Czech was as terrible as it was.

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#272

Post by tzahola » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 9:45 PM UTC

cryptonector wrote: post #255

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Truecrypt has deniable encryption and duress passwords.

No such thing. CBP aren't stupid. If they see you have something like Truecrypt installed, then they will assume you have "deniable" stuff stored and will demand to see it. And if you don't actually have it? Too bad for you. Cryptography cannot help you defeat a government's rubber host cryptanalysis.

You haven’t used Truecrypt, have you?

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#273

Post by gcb0 » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:24 PM UTC

282883392 wrote: post #167

gcb0 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's what they want you to belive. and it saddens me that they are achieving their goals. as an immigrant, I have always opted out of the scanner with undocumented effectiveness and undocumented health effects with no consequences other than a pat down.

Are Airport Body Scanners Safe? (Time, 2017) [ http://time.com/4909615/airport-body-scanners-safe/ ]

the article have one person who agrees it is insecure and another who claims it to be safe without absolutely no information whatsoever.

specially nice is the quotes: "and something you experience so infrequently, even if you’re a regular flyer—that you don’t have much to worry about."

such a glorious logical falacy. or they dont know what infrequent and/or regular means.

and yet, the author saw it proper to publish twelve quotes from that person with unbased, uncontested positive remarks. great journalism.

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#274

Post by ben_w » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:50 PM UTC

jstanley wrote: post #196

ben_w wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people, I think, don’t follow strict digital security/hygiene policies, nor understand them. That includes me, even though I try to be good. (I will not give specific details because two of my three memorable errors are currently covered by NDAs, and the third is personal).

Right, but they don't need to investigate most people . They need to investigate people who are motivated enough to... well, I'm not sure what. Cross borders while possessing illegal data? But anyway, the people who are motivated enough to do it can easily circumvent it. The only people harmed are innocents.

“Need” for what end? If there is political will to be “tough on crime”, or to reduce immigration and get away with it by saying you’re really only being tough on crime, you can probably find something on anyone simply because laws are too broad. Likewise if you care about performing economic espionage, you don’t need to worry that you’re mostly getting low-hanging fruit.

These are checks you can perform on everyone, after all.

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#275

Post by mLuby » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 11:01 PM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #250

mLuby wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your desire to push back. Having "opted out" at TSA checkpoints for a year, I can tell you that the righteous feeling does little to counteract annoyance from fellow travelers (especially those in my own party). Yes, en masse it would be effective, but until then it's not worth the individual effort IMO. Anyway, governments can't tolerate explicit affronts to their authority. The better course of action…

This is an argument against representative democracy and assumes that we are already essentially at war with our government. Civil disobedience has a long and successful history in this country. The rule of law still stands. Establishing privacy measures as tool of criminals operating outside the law does no good. TSA/DHS needs to be lobotomized/euthanized. Vote.

It's just an argument in favor of a private sector solution. ;)

War with our government is rather hyperbolic. Only nation-states can go to war—citizens are just traitors and terrorists.

- The rule of law is only as good as the people's ability to hold each other accountable. Secret rulings and operations violate that contract.

- Nobody's talking about doing anything criminal. Law enforcement operated just fine before encryption, and they'll keep us safe even when everyone has secure private communications (again).

As for voting, - As a politician, voting for "security" over privacy bothers a few constituents and just annoys the rest. Voting the other way has a non-zero chance to ending your career when the next terrorist attack happens.

- The national security agencies (and contractors) have a strong incentive to acquire power (funding/authority), which increases their ability to seek more power. The privacy charities seek to remove that power, which does not increase their ability to seek more power. In a fight between a self-reinforcing loop and a self-balancing one, I expect the former to win.

- J Edgar Hoover wasn't a unique phenomenon. Power corrupts.

But really, if everyone had unsearchable data, what's the worst that could happen (that couldn't already)?

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#276

Post by singingboyo » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 11:05 PM UTC

smcl wrote: post #271

throwaway7312 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US citizen here. Haven't visited the US in years. Myriad reasons why, but the CBP policy is part of it. Just don't like the idea of people demanding I let them go through my stuff, but also don't like the idea of sitting around for 8 or 9 hours or having my machine confiscated if I won't give up the password, either. I should also note that at least as a US citizen, having traveled through some 40 or so different cou…

I’ve heard Canada was bad from a few different people, that’s so surprising! Czech Republic is an odd one, I’ve not had any problems personally and I’ve flown in and out of Brno and Prague a few times (though I prefer Vienna). Mind sharing what happened, purely to satisfy my curiosity? I had a weird issue when one customs guy was trying to tell me that I reported my passport missing a year prior, and he got extremely…

As a Canadian: what's bad about Canadian customs/border crossings?

Can't say I've ever had a problem, but then I'm also a citizen, which may make things different.

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#277

Post by mulmen » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 11:40 PM UTC

mLuby wrote: post #275

mulmen wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an argument against representative democracy and assumes that we are already essentially at war with our government. Civil disobedience has a long and successful history in this country. The rule of law still stands. Establishing privacy measures as tool of criminals operating outside the law does no good. TSA/DHS needs to be lobotomized/euthanized. Vote.

It's just an argument in favor of a private sector solution. ;) War with our government is rather hyperbolic. Only nation-states can go to war—citizens are just traitors and terrorists. - The rule of law is only as good as the people's ability to hold each other accountable. Secret rulings and operations violate that contract. - Nobody's talking about doing anything criminal. Law enforcement operated just fine before…

I'm all for privacy protections and private sector solutions. I think that's just a good idea in general even in the absence of government surveillance. The network is compromised, etc.

I don't think we should throw up our arms and say that it is a waste of time to try and change the way DHS and TSA conduct themselves. If we do not protect our rights we will lose them. There is nothing new here. You seem to believe that citizens of the United States have no power to influence their government. I reject this belief.

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#278

Post by praneshp » Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 12:07 AM UTC

dctoedt wrote: post #263

praneshp wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an immigrant, I wouldn't expect them to make adjustments for my schedule. It's unfortunate that you went through this, but for most people priorities are different.

> As an immigrant, I wouldn't expect them to make adjustments for my schedule. Your desire not to be a burden is laudable, but there's a more-important principle at stake here. Government officials should always make an effort to accommodate reasonable requests, or if that's not possible, to explain why — and moreover, those officials, as representatives of this country and its citizens (including me), should damned…

> Your desire not to be a burden is laudable, ...

That's not what I said. I don't try not to be a burden, I just don't expect consular officials to give a shit about my schedule, and set my priorities based on that. Sure they should be welcoming and all, but it is what it is.

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#279

Post by mLuby » Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 12:14 AM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #277

mLuby wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just an argument in favor of a private sector solution. ;) War with our government is rather hyperbolic. Only nation-states can go to war—citizens are just traitors and terrorists. - The rule of law is only as good as the people's ability to hold each other accountable. Secret rulings and operations violate that contract. - Nobody's talking about doing anything criminal. Law enforcement operated just fine before…

I'm all for privacy protections and private sector solutions. I think that's just a good idea in general even in the absence of government surveillance. The network is compromised, etc. I don't think we should throw up our arms and say that it is a waste of time to try and change the way DHS and TSA conduct themselves. If we do not protect our rights we will lose them. There is nothing new here. You seem to believe t…

Not that we can't influence, but that we just have one lever when modern society calls for a whole control panel.

I generally agree with you. Didn't mean to come off so pessimistic. :)

Re: New DHS policy on demands for passwords to travelers’ electronic devices

#280

Post by CWuestefeld » Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 12:20 AM UTC

debaserab2 wrote: post #201

CWuestefeld wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The immigration system is horribly broken. My wife, too, is an immigrant, and our experience is vastly different from yours. For example, they scheduled her for an interview on a date that was impossible for her to make (iirc, that was her first day of a new job). She went to the INS offices to ask to have it rescheduled, and the person at the desk just gave her a flat "no, we do not reschedule interviews". My wife a…

Wouldn’t an immigration interview trump any other reaponsibility a person has? I’d explain to my boss the situation and see if I can get my day switched way before I’d expect any government agency to shuffle things around for my work schedule (especially any agency that’s immigration related).

I'm not sure why you'd think that the convenience of a government agency should outweigh any other concerns.