71–80 of 566 posts
Seems like real solution are phones that by default provided end-to-end-encryption for cloud backups, no local data “travel modes”, secure wipes, multiple logins, etc. — since trying to get countries to uniformly play by same rules seem highly unlikely.
It's not a technical problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or just a burner with plausible activity stored on it to give the impression that it's your main phone.
I don't get the plausible activity bit. Just tell them it is your travel phone and be done.
Terrifying for only 2 reasons: 1. Any malicious person savvy enough to pull off a crime of interest to the Feds is smart enough to provide a wiped or burner phone to DHS/ICE, and they have to know this. So, what is the point in doing this if not to target law abiding citizens. 2. USGOV has a spotty track record of keeping this information secure. A foreign actor is likely to access this info eventually. As one former…
It's the old rule known to governments all over the world - there is no such thing as an innocent citizen, there is only a citizen who you haven't investigated enough. Call me cynical but storing ALL of your digital data allows the agencies to basically find something, anything, that will allow them to further blackmail you into complying. Even the most innocent person will have something that can be misconstrued as criminal, from jokes about tax evasion to pictures of your toddler in a pool - threaten going to trial if the person doesn't do X, and most people will comply, not because they aren't innocent, but because the might of the American justice system is such that you really don't want to fuck with it on the receiving end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get the plausible activity bit. Just tell them it is your travel phone and be done.
That's not an acceptable answer in a number of countries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The ACLU is wrong. The border does it all the time. Here is the one that sticks out in my mind as the most popular case: The ACLU is not wrong, if you actually read their actual words. Your case doesn't say what you think it does. From your own article: > Bikkannavar insisted that he wasn’t allowed to do that because the phone belonged to NASA’s JPL and he’s required to protect access. Agents insisted and he finall…
That sounds great when typing it up on the internet in a comfortable chair, but when a few power hungry workers with guns are breathing down your neck in a small room you can't get out of, the rules aren't going to make you feel 'safe'.
If you are prepared for that then you absolute can and should tell them to pound sand. Just like you should to the police. But standing up for yourself has consequences you may not be prepared for. In both cases, CBP and police, you may be isolated from your loved ones, harassed, interrogated, etc in an attempt to make you crack. The difference, in a "border zone"[1] 100 miles from any border you effectively lose several important rights so the stakes are far, far higher. But, if you are truly innocent, it is worth the time to exercise your fourth and fifth amendment. As long as you present the correct paperwork the officer can't do much. However, they CAN lie. So it's imperative you know your rights to not talk yourself into probable cause.
This happened to me in 2016 crossing into Canada. Borders agents took my phone for no reason, demand I give them the password to unlock it (otherwise they would seize the phone), took it in the back for 45 min before returning it and letting me enter. I think it’s obvious they took all my data. So now when I travel I just bring my “travel” phone with no sensitive data on it.
45 minutes of unsupervised access to your phone? Even if it's a "travel" phone I wouldn't connect it to any other device after that.
Do they do this with laptops too? If not, the laziness of assuming everything is on the phone is amusing.
Yes, they do, but not all people carry laptops where pretty much everyone will have a smartphone. There have been references to Cellebrite devices which target smartphones. So when all you have is a hammer, you focus on the nails. There are stories online of people having a "travel" laptop where they fill their USB/Thunderbolt ports with epoxy or similar to prevent device connections by anyone not just at border cros…
An alternative solution might be to backup to microsds.
Do they do this with laptops too? If not, the laziness of assuming everything is on the phone is amusing.
Yes, they do, but not all people carry laptops where pretty much everyone will have a smartphone. There have been references to Cellebrite devices which target smartphones. So when all you have is a hammer, you focus on the nails. There are stories online of people having a "travel" laptop where they fill their USB/Thunderbolt ports with epoxy or similar to prevent device connections by anyone not just at border cros…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ACLU is wrong. The border does it all the time. Here is the one that sticks out in my mind as the most popular case: https://gizmodo.com/border-agent-demands-nasa-scientist-unlo...
> The ACLU is wrong. The border does it all the time. Here is the one that sticks out in my mind as the most popular case: The ACLU is not wrong, if you actually read their actual words. Your case doesn't say what you think it does. From your own article: > Bikkannavar insisted that he wasn’t allowed to do that because the phone belonged to NASA’s JPL and he’s required to protect access. Agents insisted and he finall…
This is not only a very naive take, its a dangerous one - people have been killed by law enforcement for doing what you are suggesting. Law Enforcement Officers in the US has what is known as qualified immunity. In practice qualified immunity means as long as the LEO says they believed they were following rules (even if they were not), then they can do anything they want to you (including kill you) with little to no personal consequences.
In other words, you can say "No officer, you can't look around without a warrant", to which they can say "I see an object that may be a gun, and you're moving your hand in the direction of your pocket. Stop. I'm afraid for my life, I need to break your car windows and throw you on the street"
It's common enough that a LEO can publicly and slowly strangle George Floyd on the street, recorded and in front of others, and the only notable/unusual aspect is that the police officer was convicted of a crime.
Your rights don't mean shit to cops.