
My phone was searched at LAX, which apparently is the new normal - JumpCrisscross
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-adi-fourth-amendment-airport-cellphone-search-20170407-story.html?utm_source=Today%27s+Headlines&utm_campaign=347bc3a518-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b04355194f-347bc3a518-80983953
======
readhn
\- Terrorism is not a problem at all! -

Instead of fixing the real issues this country has: poverty, homelessness,
joblessness, hunger, drug abuse, health care accessibility, affordable housing
accessibility - we prefer to look for a boogeymen outside of the country.

Around 500-1000 Homeless Americans die from hypothermia per year, 2000-4000
Americans die per year from hunger, 35000 people on average die from drug over
dose, over 500,000 people die from heart desease so in the last 15 years we
lost just to these causes - around 8million people!

According to a September 2016 study by Alex Nowrasteh at the Cato Institute, a
libertarian think tank, some 3,024 Americans died from 1975 through 2015 due
to foreign-born terrorism. That number includes the 9/11 terrorist attacks
(2,983 people) and averages nearly 74 Americans per year.

8million+ people dead vs. 3000? So where are the real issues?

Why do we allow the government propaganda machine to fool us?

~~~
NotHereNotThere
I always have a hard time interpreting these statistics.

I understand the numbers of terrorist-related deaths versus non-terrorist one
are staggering as displayed above, but if we stopped funding these security
measures at airports (scanners, staff, etc), what could the number go up to?

Are these 3000 deaths so low _because_ of the security measures? If we were to
remove/loosen security measures at airports, how could we even estimate the
impact in number of terrorist-related deaths?

Are these fears of possible ramp-up of terrorist attacks (if security measures
are loosened) unfounded?

~~~
Retric
These 3000 deaths approximately zero relation to security measures.

The US government was informed about the 9/11 hijackers and the Boston city
Marathon bombers etc. But, they get 99.99% false positives, so such
information is basically worthless unless it results in conviction. Further
the 9/11 hijackers used weapons no more deadly than what people are still
allowed to bring on aircraft. If there where enough terrorists to matter they
could have repeated 9/11 any time in the last 10 years. The most 'useful'
security measure from 9/11 is a 'secure' door that locks which directly
relates do another crashed aircraft making even that if anything a net loss.
[http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/26/europe/france-germanwings-
plan...](http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/26/europe/france-germanwings-plane-crash-
main/)

That said, like the 'war on drugs' it has nothing to do with the actual
'threat' it's all just politics.

~~~
tomschlick
The only real improvements in security since 9/11 in my mind are that cockpit
doors are now reinforced and passengers know to fight back.

Everything else is just a show of force to make people feel better.

~~~
Retric
If you clicked on my link that door has already cost 1 aircraft so it's not a
pure win. [http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/26/europe/france-germanwings-
plan...](http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/26/europe/france-germanwings-plane-crash-
main/)

Passengers fighting back only works if they know there is a problem and the
attackers are in the passenger cabin. Once the attacker is past that door they
can ignore them.

~~~
tomschlick
Agreed. There is always going to be risk. Especially if the pilot has gone
rouge. But the chances of passenger(s) taking over a plane like on 9/11 had
drastically decreased because of awareness and those doors.

~~~
LordWinstanley
>Especially if the pilot has gone rouge

What have you got against pink pilots?

------
jonstokes
"More recently I was made to wonder: Does the 4th Amendment apply to Muslim
citizens at LAX?"

Well, no actually, it does not. Nor does it apply to non-Muslim citizens, or
white citizens, or any other types of citizens.

And excuse me, but you were just "recently" made to wonder about this? Only
recently?!?

We apparently decided after 9/11 that airports and any place within 100 miles
of the border were going to be Constitution-free zones, where the laws around
search and seizure just do not apply to anyone.

The following happened to me, for instance, in an airport in 2006:

[https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/05/6767-2/](https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/05/6767-2/)

This is one of those things that kills me -- those of us whining about all
this, especially under Obama, were "shrill" civil libertarians. But then Trump
came to power.

Now that this crap is happening under Trump, and it's happening to ACLU
lawyers and doctors and newspaper journos and so on (cue the scary music),
it's suddenly a crisis, and people's hair is on fire.

It was a crisis over a decade ago, when we just abandoned the Constitution in
airports and at borders. And the warning that civil libertarians gave, which
was roundly ignored, was "wait until the wrong person gets hold of this
power."

~~~
tptacek
The hundred-mile border thing is a myth; it refers to a SCOTUS holding that
limits searches with a nexus to a border crossing to within that distance, but
does not allow CBP to search people who haven't transacted directly with the
border in some way.

ACLU, which I otherwise support wholeheartedly, does us all a mild disservice
by perpetuating the myth, which is very widely believed.

~~~
specialp
Really? What about the checkpoints that are set up within this zone stopping
and questioning people without reasonable suspicion or knowledge that person
crossed the border at all.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ea_VMY0UnA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ea_VMY0UnA)

~~~
tptacek
The border search exemption applies only to people who have transacted
directly with a border. Being 20 miles from a border gives CBP no special
powers over ordinary citizens.

~~~
tunap
CBP routinely stops & questions all north-bound traffic on US 54 >20 miles
north-east of El Paso. Am unsure of the distance, but they did request opening
my rear hatch(SUV) to facilitate the dog sniffing my parts boxes and tools.

Am pretty sure the checkpoints on I-10 in western AZ are >100 miles N of the
border, the Tohono O'odham* rez lies between I-10 & the border.

* The elders have also stated no wall will be built on their lands.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tohono_O%27odham#Border_issues](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tohono_O%27odham#Border_issues)

~~~
desdiv
You might have hit one of these:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_in...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_interior_checkpoints#Arizona)

------
struppi
Every time US border security is being discusses here, I read comments about
how things are bad at the Canadian or UK border too.

But does this really make an overreaction legitimate - That other countries
are doing it too? Please think again before writing some knee-jerk reaction
like "other countries are the same or worse"...

I was once treated unfriendly by Austrian border agents while re-entering the
country. Yes, I experienced worse things when entering other countries. I
still think that this particular incident was unacceptable, even though things
are worse in other countries...

~~~
djsumdog
> I read comments about how things are bad at the Canadian or UK border too.

I've flown through Germany, Moldova, the UK, Ireland, Singapore, Australia,
etc. etc.

America is the worst. Most other countries will not preform pat downs. The
German head of transport security even mentioned the body scanners have over a
50% false positive rate (they're literally about the same as random chance;
multi million dollar worthless pieces of security theatre shit that should be
removed).

The only pat down I recall was Moldova, and even there it was just your legs.
I won't fly in the US any more. If I need to leave the country, I'd rather
just take a bus to Canada. At least if they violate my rights there, I'm not a
citizen and it doesn't bother me.

~~~
leereeves
> the body scanners have over a 50% false positive rate (they're literally
> about the same as random chance)

That's nowhere near random chance, unless they're flagging half the people who
walk through.

If they're flagging 1 in 1000, random chance would be a 99.9% false positive
rate.

------
princetman
I really want to travel to Florida from London with my wife and baby for
holidays. Stories like this though are big deterrent. I'm an atheist with a
muslim name, and Chinese wife(a devout Christian). We've never travelled to US
before and honestly don't know what to expect.

~~~
robk
This is really an overreaction I believe. I know many many Muslims who
regularly go from UK to the US without any hassles at all. Of course as a non-
Muslim I'm always terrified by these stories but the odds are very very low -
you'd probably have a greater likelihood of being hassled coming into the UK
from a non_EU country honestly.

~~~
thomastjeffery
Sure it is not representative, but that does not mean we should not be
concerned. The constitution of the United States is extremely important.

------
archildress
I'm most frightened by how frequently these types of things are happening, and
how normal they're starting to seem.

~~~
brianbreslin
This most definitely doesn't seem normal. Problem is so many are looking the
other way thinking "well I don't look like a terrorist, so no one will search
my phone"

~~~
annnnd
"First they came for..." [0]

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_..](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_..).

------
leereeves
All my electronic devices were searched by Canadian Border Services when I
crossed the border into Canada four years ago.

~~~
Mk-0
Same.

This has nothing to do with who is leading our country. The only thing new
here is that it's easy to point the finger at one person for everything you
don't like; it's been in place for awhile now.

~~~
emodendroket
Is that so? Here's the article's take!

> The so-called border search exemption means that the 4th Amendment’s
> requirement of probable cause does not apply to customs officials, and the
> practice of “detaining” cellphones began under the George W. Bush
> administration. But cellphone searches by the Department of Homeland
> Security have exploded in 2017 — DHS officials searched more phones in
> February of this year than in all of 2015. (Four members of Congress
> introduced a bill this week that would require agents to obtain a warrant
> before searching a U.S. citizen’s electronic device.)

~~~
rileymat2
It is odd that they compared to 2015 instead of 2016.

There could be a good reason, but it feels manipulative.

~~~
matthewmacleod
I don't think there's anything odd about this at all. It will just be the case
that someone looked at the figures, said "Oh, it's interesting that there were
more searches in February 2017 than in 2015 overall" and ran with that figure.
It's a more interesting comparison than "There was an increase of 142% year-
on-year" or whatever the actual figures are.

~~~
rileymat2
Full Quote: "But cellphone searches by the Department of Homeland Security
have exploded in 2017 — DHS officials searched more phones in February of this
year than in all of 2015. (Four members of Congress introduced a bill this
week that would require agents to obtain a warrant before searching a U.S.
citizen’s electronic device.)

President Trump’s new security regime wastes yet more of our time and our
taxpayer money and shows outright scorn for the spirit of the 4th Amendment."

The article is making it look like this is due to Trump, but if there was an
ongoing increase for 2 years under Obama that would be manipulative.

------
ge96
Man that is brutal. Hurt back? TOO BAD!!!

Recently worked with explosives haha, she buys fertilizer on the wrong day.

I'm pretty ignorant, I hope our country works itself out, would be a pity to
go down after winning WW2 sure 70+ years later

Oh well... Like the Romans I guess

Edit: I really am ignorant to the world, busy being poor, chasing the dream of
"entrepreneurship" 30% of nothing is nothing. Too scared to use the bike rack
on the public bus so instead I'll walk for 1.5 hrs (6 miles) home. Scared of
bums asking me for money.

Oh well, 1 in 330+million, some people will save us hopefully. It's just hard
to see the bad stuff to me because I'm in my own little peasant world. Am I
losing my rights/internet privacy problems? I don't know... I don't feel free
that's for sure just because of finances but that's not permanent/my own
fault.

Ahhh well live or die my life was alright, I was privileged. A bag of meat on
a rock.

~~~
0xfeba
> would be a pity to go down after winning WW2 sure 70+ years later

The USA "won" WW2?

~~~
ge96
To charlseism, sorry you are wise.

I wasn't really making the point of the war itself (who did what) more on the
number of people that died and what "we" overcame and then in the future we
have this BS that we deal with. Still what about back then, their "ideals"
with women cooking at home and that was their life. I don't know like I said
I'm ignorant.

(easy way out of an argument just keep saying I'm dumb) also not take
responsibility for what I say. Ahh well... I'm like a baby that was discarded
and should not have survived but somehow I made it, defective unit. What is
success anyway, money? Peace of mind.

------
LeonM
Last week, Apple insisted on me giving my account password + filevault
password to replace the battery (!) of my macbook at the Apple store. So I
guess it's just an American thing to do...

~~~
mcone
I had a similar experience two weeks ago. They asked for my iPhone's passcode
when I went in to have my screen replaced. This was apparently going to be
stored in a database — I saw the form field on his iPad.

When I refused to give it to them, on the basis of privacy, the employee said
that Apple could not provide the service. He backed down a little when I asked
to speak to his supervisor, but then said that not providing my passcode would
void my iPhone's warranty. Eventually they performed the service without my
passcode and had me perform the functional testing myself before walking out
of the store.

I wonder how many thousands (millions?) of iPhone passcodes are stored in
Apple's database? And of course the average owner probably doesn't think to
change the passcode after the service is completed.

~~~
HappyTypist
The reason for asking for your passcode is so they can perform functional
testing, and they don't end up giving customers a device that isn't perfect.

It is stored in a database, but the passcode is deleted immediately after the
genius marks the service as completed.

~~~
tfryman
"Deleted immediately" is more likely a flag in the database being set to
"don't show".

~~~
smarx007
Well, it might be deleted immediately from the prod DB, but there is always a
DB backup...

------
JumpCrisscross
> _I intend to file no lawsuit, seek no apology_

I don't understand this attitude.

~~~
emodendroket
Filing a lawsuit is a tremendous investment of time and money and it's not
really clear that these kinds of searches are in any way illegal.

~~~
quirkot
Ambiguity is is the bosom buddy of petty tyrany

~~~
emodendroket
As far as I know they're 100% legal, which is not the same as claiming they're
good or moral.

------
therealmarv
Just and idea for Android: If you are rooted: Make a backup with nandroid and
put it somewhere encrypted on your laptop or cloud. Make Backup with root,
syncthing and rsync of your sd card (it's so complicated because many cannot
remove internal "SD"). Reset phone. Cross border. Restore both backups.

The question is: WHY I need to this counter measures to protect my right of
privacy when entering a country like the USA.

~~~
krisdol
What would they do if you just don't carry your phone with you when you fly?
One could ship their phone or put it in checked luggage.

They are not just looking for data at the border, they are imaging the phone
and keeping those records for god knows how long and with what level of
security. That is a level of privacy I'm not willing to give up, let alone the
risk of having company confidential data end up in unintended hands.

~~~
ojbyrne
In the US if you end up in secondary inspection, your checked luggage can be
brought there too.

------
amckenna
She went through standard TSA searches - scans, pat downs, and explosive
chemical swabbing. (I travel twice a month and have TSA-Pre and I still have
to go through that 1/3 of the time). She was then questioned about the nature
of her travels. Upon return she was questioned about her travels, the contents
of a CD she had, why she tried to open up a bank account abroad, and where the
thousands of dollars she left with went. I don't think it was unreasonable for
border patrol to be suspicious. Their job is to investigate suspicious
behavior and from their perspective they don't know whether the woman was
telling the truth or not, but the facts of the matter do raise suspicion. I
would be a bit more worried if they didn't ask all of those questions and
investigate the issue, why else are we paying them?

~~~
thomastjeffery
> I would be a bit more worried if they didn't ask all of those questions and
> investigate the issue, why else are we paying them?

Why _are_ we paying them? Their "service" is, _at best_ , inconvenient, and
certainly unconstitutional.

The issue is not that this individual was inconvenienced.

The issue is that the constitution of the United States is being thoroughly
disobeyed by the federal government of the United States.

------
brbsix
Does anyone know whether travelers are required to facilitate these phone
searches (e.g. enter encryption password at boot and disable screen lock)?

Edit: Found relevant article at [https://arstechnica.com/tech-
policy/2017/02/what-could-happe...](https://arstechnica.com/tech-
policy/2017/02/what-could-happen-if-you-refuse-to-unlock-your-phone-at-the-us-
border/)

In summary, yes. It is a misdemeanor (subject to a fine of not more than
$1,000) to refuse to provide assistance (e.g. translation or decryption).
Assuming you refuse, they will likely seize the device and detain you for some
unknown period of time.

~~~
darkarmani
What if you and your wife enter on different flights? Wouldn't it makes sense
to carry each other's devices and not share the passwords with each other? You
aren't refusing; you have a plausible defense to not knowing the passwords.

It's less compelling, but i guess you could have a trusted friend change your
passwords for you and require them to later unlock them. (after you get out of
detainment 5 days later and fight in court -- instead of the gov't winning,
you both lose)

~~~
enknamel
Do you seriously think a TSA agent would just say "Oh this phone isn't yours
and you can't unlock it? I better just let you take it on the plane!"

If they cannot perform the search no matter what your excuse is, I seriously
doubt they will let that phone, or even you, enter.

~~~
darkarmani
> If they cannot perform the search no matter what your excuse is, I seriously
> doubt they will let that phone, or even you, enter.

If you are a US citizen, they can't really keep you out of the country for
this. They can make it hell, but not keep you out. If you are not a citizen,
then yes, they can send you right back.

------
mixmastamyk
This title has little to do with the content of the post, phone copying was
the least of this lady's problems.

------
bborud
This is to protect your Freedom[tm].

------
Eclyps
I know that there is racial profiling going on, and travel to certain
countries will have higher numbers of individuals with certain ethnic
backgrounds, but how often is this happening to middle-class white Americans?
I used to travel a great deal but haven't done much over the past 5 years.

I remember being questioned for about 15 minutes on my flight from the UK to
Paris back around 2008. My trip from the US to Turkey from 2013 was pretty
timid, maybe 2 minutes of questions and a mandatory body scan (stopover in
Amsterdam). From the US to South Africa completely painless. I did get my
hands swabbed for explosive residue on a trip from Detroit to Las Vegas a
couple years ago.

I'm just curious if anyone here has personal experience as a middle class
white individual getting treatment as harsh as I read in some of these
articles.

~~~
arethuza
Maybe 5 or 6 years ago I got a very unpleasant grilling traveling to the US
when they noticed that I had multiple passport stamps from Turkey and Egypt.

I had to explain repeatedly why I liked Turkey in particular and kept getting
asked over and over "Why Turkey?".

[NB Turkey used to be an extremely popular holiday destination for people from
the UK and I've been traveling there regularly for 20+ years].

------
lordlimecat
>I intend to file no lawsuit, seek no apology.

WHY???? Of all people, the ones who get targeted have standing! Of all people,
she might have a shot of pulling in the 4th AND the 14th amendments!

I know people want to live their lives rather than get embroiled in legal
fights but the ones whose lives are interrupted by this sort of injustice are
the only ones who CAN put a stop to this.

------
danesparza
Is a reasonable work around to ship your phone to your future destination?

~~~
Jdam
\- make a cloud-backup

\- purge your phone

\- enter the US, let them search your plain vanilla phone

\- restore backup

~~~
sunwooz
If you got a full tutorial on this, I would love to read it ;)

~~~
emodendroket
Do you really need a tutorial specifically on this? Backup, restore, and
wiping your phone are all well-documented procedures.

------
kw71
Man. Being treated this way would make me want to explode.

------
huffmsa
I haven't taken my smarterthanyou phone traveling in years.

Get a $70 candybar, assume it will be lost, stolen, broken, pawned while
overseas.

Problem solved -- at least the phone part.

------
visarga
I understand that they want passwords for cloud accounts. Do they ask you for
your Reddit / YC accounts as well, or just FB, Twitter and G+?

~~~
Spooks
I don't know if that would work for social sites where you don't need an
account. Lots of people just browse reddit/yc without an account.

------
thebarknight
What would happen if one traveled without any electronics today? Say you left
your phone, laptop etc at home? Genuinely curious

------
JohnLeTigre
Not to be incendiary but when she said "the ongoing erosion of our rights", I
cringed.

Nobody has the "right" not to be searched or interrogated at borders (except
for some politicians that have diplomatic immunity).

Is she a politician? if not, no right was infringed.

~~~
Dylan16807
You have the right to enter your own country.

~~~
JohnLeTigre
Of course, but they have the right to know what you are bringing in, this can
involve searching people, it's a practical necessity.

Try entering your country with a piece of nuclear grade uranium.

~~~
LordWinstanley
I know some people's online comments are pretty toxic, but I'm struggling to
think of a scenario whereby a Twitter stream or Facebook timeline could be
used to make a 'dirty bomb' \--and I'm not having much luck.

Could you help me out here?

~~~
JohnLeTigre
I'm sure you are aware that their justification is to help determine if people
are linked to dangerous groups or not.

Personally I wouldn't go that far but still, my point is that: not being
searched at the border is a priviledge, not a right.

------
Shivetya
I know this won't be popular but I will ask it anyway.

How is searching a phone any different than customs searching all luggage
inbound to the US. How are the contents of digital devices considered to be
sufficiently different that they don't warrant a cursory scan, if not
automatic scan?

Then it comes down to, what exactly could you scan for anyway? Could they do
short term scan/records and delete upon leaving the country or short duration?
Where is the justification for doing this to citizens of this country or
countries not considered to an active threat?

~~~
nraynaud
because they are copied and stored indefinitely without any promise of not
spilling the content. And also that's the kind of thing that leads to an
entire village in Yemen to be killed, women and children included, in the
middle of the night by the Navy Seals.

~~~
LordWinstanley
There's also a delicious irony in the fact the border agents would no doubt
claim not to be stealing your data, but merely making a copy of it --while at
the same time the US is extraditing people from around the world, to charge
them with piracy, for copying music and movie files. In which case, it seems,
copying data _is_ theft.

