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

71–80 of 142 posts

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

#71

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

dylan604 wrote: post #21
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…

> 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…

Here's a fun story from about 20 years ago: https://www.wired.com/2007/04/canadian-psycho/

Spiteful border agents is not a new thing (I love the URL shortening).

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

#72

Post by airstrike »

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…

> This directive was issued in January of this year, what is relevance of being posted today?

The best time to plant a tree is 10 years ago. The second best time is today.

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

#73

Post by jscho »

866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #65
smdyc1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have? My international relatives have never been searched to that degree, if at all. That said, the whole thing is overreach in any democratic society.

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 without penalty. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe in some few cases, you can even pick it up on your return.

If it's something like large amounts of cash, goods, alcohol or cigarettes, you may have to pay a tax or import fee and answer a few questions. Just don't be a dimwit.

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

#74

Post by LocalH »

tptacek wrote: post #47
KennyBlanken wrote: post #23

A friendly reminder that the CBP has decreed itself to have authority within 100 miles of any US border, as that it is its interpretation of "a reasonable distance" from said border. That basically encompasses two thirds of the population. The last two years have demonstrated a radical need to curtail that range of authority and shift from it being vaguely specified to a concrete legislative specification. Even ten m…

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.

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

#75

Post by testing22321 »

dylan604 wrote: post #21
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…

> 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…

> but you get to go home

Not always.

They must admit you, but they can arrest you one second later

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

#76

Post by LocalH »

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.

> The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices.

Don't worry, they're working on ending birthright citizenship

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

#77

Post by XorNot »

stavros wrote: post #28
XorNot wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't work well in my experience. What I want is to get my home screen back exactly as I left it: I've not found anything able to pull it off on Android though. Ideally it would be an exact flash image of the phone.

Adb backup exists, though I haven't tried it, and Google cloud backup does this. However, if you trust Google, you probably already trust the US. Unfortunately, I don't know of any other app that does this on an unrooted phone.

Google cloud backup has never done this for me. It seems like it'll restore a whole lot of stuff, but details like getting my Nova Launcher screen back (version pinned to before it was sold - alternatives just aren't good enough yet) or a bunch of the little logins and details has never done it for me.

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

#78

Post by rawgabbit »

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…

Further down, paragraph 5.3.3 says they could detain your phone if they could not bypass the passcode. What are they checking. How many times I read memes making fun of El Leader?

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

#79

Post by dylan604 »

gruez wrote: post #67
two_handfuls wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question was: "Does that apply to non-citizens?" Saying "they can deport you" without specifying whether the hypothetical "you" is a citizen or not means you did not answer the question. Not that you have to answer a stranger's question, but I thought I would clear the confusion in the hope it may be helpful.

The premise (non-citizen) is in the question and doesn't need to be repeated. C'mon, this isn't grade school where you have to answer questions by first restating the question in its entirety.

No, but even in grade school, the teacher would get the student to actually answer the question when it is clearly being evaded. Or maybe put the student's name on the board for wasting everyone's time for being obstinate.

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

#80

Post by jkestner »

wilted-iris wrote: post #38
TylerE wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More importantly, they count ocean as border.

International airports as well.

And Lake Michigan, as it’s connected to international water. Suppose next they’ll claim all rivers as borders.
Post reply on HN