In any case, this was extremely intrusive and I couldn't stop thinking about it the whole trip. I wondered what would happen if I had actually forgotten my phone password - just weeks before I changed from a 6 digit numeric code to a longer alphanumeric and almost forgot it since it had been a while since the last time I restarted my phone requiring password entry. I had a lot of very private photos and conversations on there with my SO. Definitely ruined my whole vacation.
Edit: Also, they didn't just stick to private photos and messages, they even opened up dating apps checking for messages there, opened up unread snap and kik messages too.
Not quite that it's "no threat", more like no additional threat than memorizing a long passphrase and downloading / decrypting your illegal Canadian porno on the other side.
> Similarly, there is no possible way to harm an airplane based on what is present on a laptop; and even if there were, you could buy in-flight WiFi and download the bits after boarding. You could cross the checkpoint with a blank device and in seconds have it populated with whatever you wanted to have. It’s insane.
It's not insane though. The point isn't to catch anything, it's to acclimate the populace to this type of search and seizure. Kind of like how refusing to go through the body scanners at the airport earns you "What's up with that guy?" looks from other travelers.
It's not enough to just re-install the OS. You have to have your hardware recycled (discarded). Within a couple of seconds, they can put spyware onto your firmware by simply inserting a prepared USB device. The only way to get rid of that kind of spyware is to destroy the hardware.
The other solution is to not travel to any totalitarian countries or to travel there without any hardware, if you must.
You should not acknowledge, recognize or legitimise these 'unnatural rights'.
Even more important to me is the fact that once you lose exclusive physical control over your hardware, you must consider it compromised, and therefor have it recycled (it is enough to simply connect a prepared USB device to your device for a couple of seconds in order for you to lose total control over it and be under permanent and total remote surveillance).
To me, this is more than enough of a reason to simply not travel to countries like the US (and now apparently Canada as well) anymore. And any such country certainly doesn't deserve us.
At an extreme - if you had a document plan_to_takedown_flight_123ABC.pdf or diary_about_my_drug_smuggling_operation.txt, whether or not the data itself is a threat, it could indicate that you are.
I mean, I think it's bullshit, the same way I think most security screening and border guard questioning is bullshit, but if you wanted to maximize your border security (and keep out, ahem, "undesirables") and don't care about people's privacy, it's perfectly logical.
If your threat model is that someone capable enough to take down a flight is dumb enough to keep "plan_to_takedown_flight_123ABC.pdf" on their laptop, then it's logical. Otherwise you're wasting resources and _minimizing_ your security.
I guess it depends on how much you care about your personal info or how sensitive your data is, but I wouldn't budge based on this. I'd say, "Okay, I want to talk to the American embassy," then wait it out.
Edit: To be clear, this would be my response without knowing anything about the relevant Canadian law — since I don't – because the statement sounds like a lie. LE lies all the time. Indefinite imprisonment of a random person? Nah. And breaking into a locked phone is actually very difficult — see Apple versus FBI.
This is not true. You've already entered the country, and so the border staff (US, Canadian, whoever) can indeed detain you, throw you into immigration detention, take all your stuff, really whatever they want. You don't have any rights. You could call your embassy, but they will tell you that so long as the other country is following its own laws, you're stuck, and they can't help you.
If you don't like it, don't go.
Even if you decide not to enter as opposed to being denied I bet it pops up on their screen for a long time.
If a border agent threatened me with jail, I don't think that being unable to return would be a problem for me. :-)
(Disclaimer: having no family in Canada, or any real need to be there.)
No, just like the US:
A non citizen can be refused entry but they absolutely have a right to not be arbitrarily detained.
But I'm not seeing where "non citizens have no rights" or the court says that whole sections cannot be applied to non-citizens and the word everyone doesn't mean what we think. In fact I'm seeing some rulings where the court acknowledged for example that equality rights do apply to non citizens.
I am seeing a case where they allowed someone to be detained, but it seems they found a way to decide that the restriction was reasonable and therefore constitutional, but they didn't decide that non-citizens cannot benefit from this right.
You'd be waiting forever.
This kind of stuff happens all day, every day, at every one of the major border crossings.
You'd be denied entry and that would be the end of it.
"I might end up waiting weeks or months, though."
The American embassy will tell you there's nothing they can do, and you'd be waiting in perpetuity in a hotel on the American side of the border.
The thing is, you may not have such 'rights', at least not in a legal sense. I suggest the duderinos at the border are well aware of what they can, and cannot do.
If you have a beef, it's with Homeland Security or Congress, not the border guy.
And if you're entering a foreign country ... well, your legal rights are pretty thin. So there's that.
PR Storm? This is the first I've read about it, and it's the NY Times. I don't see anything relating to it on CBC, Globe or National Post sites. Nothing on CBC Radio 1 in my drive to or from work, either.
I normally wipe my devices while crossing the border, phone and laptop but one time while I was doing a much shorter round trip, I decided not to wipe my phone.
on my way into Canada, i was identified for enhanced screening at like 10pm, After waiting an hour, the agent asked for my return flight ticket, which I didn't have printed. so it's late, im dangerously close to missing my connection, and I think, "Oh! I probably have the confirmation email on my phone!"
So i pull out my trusty CIA surveillance device, unlock it, and pull up the confirmation email. The agent then takes it directly out of my hands and walks into the back. I don't know how long he was gone (long enough to miss my flight) but when he came back he had a bunch of questions about a girl I had been texting and who had sent me some provocative photos. I don't know that helped Canada's national security but sure, whatever.
To be fair, the US CBP has never taken any devices from me but they do stop me routinely and dump my bag and ask all sorts of ridiculous questions. I used to fight it but now I just sit/stand quietly until they are done. On my latest trip, i guess I was too polite so the agent decided that was suspicious. His face got all twisted as he began asking me the questions.
There are no rights at the border so don't cross with anything.
Everything I need I can download again, or log back into. working out 2fa was a blessing and a curse. decoupling it from sms has been great but I do rely on a centralized service to store a theoretically encrypted backup. I'm lucky to have a pretty decent memory, so I everything else I just remember.
I guess the part that is the most frustrating is that as a result I don't really save or take many pictures. i don't backup or save any additional contacts. I don't save anything important in messaging applications. Oh, and I can't decrypt pgp communications when I'm out of the country, because like hell I'm bringing that accross the border.
I've had my encounters with law enforcement, I won't ever feel comfortable again. I'll never forget the look on their faces when they look at you like they know something super private and they find it hilarious.
^Can make an image of that too for ease of use on future trips.
Of course, if they can do this, there's nothing really stopping them from forcing you to log into your webmail either, so maybe there's nothing you can ultimately do. (At least short of creating elaborate decoy accounts, but then you're actively lying to them, which probably isn't a great idea.)
Also, I tend to use my phone a lot when I'm traveling, so I'd like to have it!
I immediately started using TrueCrypt with the plausible deniability option, which allows you to enter an alternate password to open a completely different part of the encrypted area seeded with some random files that look realistic enough to pass scrutiny.
It was always fun to unmount the volume and remount it with the plausible deniability volume. Or, just shutting down before crossing the border and knowing that, if needed, I'd enter the alternate password.
Recently I started using a Mac and Apple's own full disk encryption, but reading this just highlights the risk. Maybe I should start using TrueCrypt again.
These searches, if true, have nothing to do with border security and more to do with fishing for anything and everything they can charge you with once they aren't encumbered with warrants and courts and due process.
With obscenity laws and laws outlawing certain drawings and such, porn is just the low hanging fruit.
Make a second password which "unlocks" the phone to some innocuous mode that won't hold the meatheads attention any longer.
Assuming you aren't specifically targeted.
Also, if driving a nice car was the key to getting past BP, drug smugglers would have figured this out ages ago and adopted it as SOP.
Pulling over a driver and pointing a gun at them? Trivial. Pulling over a livery vehicle and searching the passenger? Complicated. Demanding someone in a car give you their phone's password? Trivial. Doing the same at the airport? My weekends filled for a month hosting fundraisers for PACs.
I have SSD drive that I use in States. Once I'm ready to go, I swap it with "empty" drive and fire up the OS just to get some updates on files on it, so it doesn't look like it hasn't been used for a long time.
Once in Europe, I put the drive that has more tools and my files I use daily. I also use personal DropBox and the most important files are sync over the net when I login from Europe.
As to the phone - my network doesn't work in Europe anyways, so instead of selling/throwing away my perfectly working Iphone5, I use it in Europe and my new phone I leave in states.
Moreover I cannot say much about driving to Canada, but I was tempted once with saving $150 on a ticket and flying to Europe through Montreal instead of Chicago. That was horrible mistake. That airport is super disorganized and there is literally no staff to help you. No other information than to research for yourself. Few years ago some guy got teased to death because he was so frustrated and I don't blame him...
As of the phone in US, I have jailbroken version with an app that allows me to do a triple-click to shut it down completely. I got used to using this trick when I'm pulled over by LE or entering airports or other places... just in case!
I don't think I would ever give out my password without talking to a lawyer first.
I reasoned that an old Blackberry is good because there really isn't much you can do with it beyond text/email/web. And it makes me look like a tech-illiterate luddite.
"Oh, you brought an empty phone? Give me access to your cloud account. No? Ok, you're never entering our country. Bye."
But don't be mistaken, that based on the Snowden revelations, "they" may not have already had it, and needed another country's intelligence agency to access it first -- for them to get to whatever it might be, and possibly even use it against you, legally.
It's also quite unlikely that they can circumvent a basic `tar -c /dev/block/* | gpg -se ...` scheme that's trivially doable on unlockable Android phones. (Replacing the bootloader with a maliciously crafted variant that returns false partition data after bootup would work, but once again: CBSA.)
You're probably safe if you just do an iCloud backup and wipe followed later by a restore.
Certainly do replace the SIM card as soon as possible though, IMO. Unless you can verify it somehow.
How is a cell phone any different?
Asking for passwords to Facebook accounts or other information that isn't on your phone, now that's another story.
When crossing the border... backup and factory reset. Don't carry anything with you over the border you don't want customs officers looking at. I just hang onto one of my older phones to use when I travel.
When your phone is taken away after they forced you enter SU level password, you have no control of it, they do.
Whoever took it inside the room, they can:
>Browser your email, check who you contacted since you have you email box: Why you bought this on amazon? Why you bought that from Ebay? For what reason you purchase two pressure cookers from and nails from Walmart at the same time?
>Check your contacts: Who is Mr.X? When was the last time you talk to Mr. Y? What was in the conversation?
>Check what you have posted on facebook/Twitter. You supported Aaron Swartz? You are in the protest called The Day we Fight Back? What was the protest about? Who you are with?
>You may have home security Cam APP installed: Who sitting in the sofa? How many rooms do you have? Is this your wife? What is her social security number? What is her first name? On the day of Feb 21, 2013, who are the two male visited your home? What's their name and what's the purpose of the visit? How long they stayed in your house? What car they are diving? What is the plate number?
>Copy all your photos for further investation.
>Install Spyware, Copy your RSA key stored in your phone.
Border staff often have a set of rules they have to follow, a lot of it is to ward off attempts at illegal migration.
Getting into America or Canada via that border is rather common.
When I was at the Canadian border once, a woman from Jamaica, with a carload of luggage was denied entry essentially on the same basis - no proof of return travel, reservations etc. - they essentially suspected she was trying to gain illegal status. Which is not entirely unreasonable in that case, but even then, tricky.
The rough part is how normal folks get caught up in the policies.
The one about dope is particularly pernicious - if you admit to 'having ever smoked dope' to American border agents - they can deny you entry for quite a long time. That one's a little crazy-crazy if you ask me, just a bad policy.
Surely being from Jamaica is a thing that normal folks do, if that's where they're from.
B) A lone Jamaican, with a car full of luggage
C) No travel reservations
D) Jamaica is a poor country, likely higher rates of immigration issues.
These are red flags.
The 'border game' is a game of probabilities.
When I moved to Norway from the US, I had to have a return flight booked to get entry into the country the first time, otherwise there is a chance of being denied entry, which can really ruin your chances for immigration.
In moments like this, I'm happy to be employed by a large company that has a strong vested interest against people snooping through my emails.
If such a situation were to happen in my case, I would just reply "I cannot do that as this phone belongs to $company. My employer knows of my travel itinerary and if I am delayed they will be very happy to send lawyers to sort things out."
It's sad and dystopian, but I trust my employer to watch out for my interests more so than any government.
I don't get it. Are you a journalist, too?
Laws like this are silly, horrible, and have no place in a democracy. Even disgusting speech ought to be defended.
Canada, the UK and NZ (edit: and Australia, where someone was, I believe, jailed for having "Simpsons porn" on his computer) are places that I know have laws like this. As a citizen of one of these places, it worries me greatly, even though I am not interested in such drawings. It actually enrages me, far more than any other problem in the Western world.
Please be careful when crossing borders.
I agree. Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge I would guess these cases would not hold up to the scrutiny of the supreme court, if they were ever brought there.
As a non legal expert, my reading has been that the Supreme Court usually has, at least in the past, set a very high bar in ruling against free expression, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_v._Massachusetts
Maybe someone has a more educated opinion than I, though.
I really don't want to see our Bill of Rights torn apart. As one user said here, they have a theory these policies serve a purpose to acclimate us to a new kind of authoritarian government. I have a lot of personal family pride in fighting for civil and human rights, and I am personally troubled by what seems to be an ever-steady march towards 1984, if we're not already there.
> Canada, the UK and NZ (edit: and Australia, where someone was, I believe, jailed for having "Simpsons porn" on his computer) are places that I know have laws like this.
By the way, NZ is particularly outrageous and ridiculous with these laws. What I find particularly bemusing is that while in NZ has they can ban a book for mainstream sexual content with little quarrel, Auckland has a visible prostitution market. I'm not necessarily saying one thing or another about prostitution, but I think it says something about the recklessness with free speech there. Their failed War on Drugs is also outrageous, arguably the highest per-capita WoD programs in the world, and is expanding.
> it's never really an issue here.
Fair enough, but I think that's an opinion we just disagree on.
Someone posted under this topic the idea that the point of these violations of civil liberties, even if "they aren't really an issue," is exactly that: to acclimate us to think, "it's not really an issue."
Freedom of expression is something I believe we are very lucky to have, people have fought and died for much lesser freedoms. Banning books is a threatening move by government and something that should happen only in utterly extreme circumstances, if at all. In this case, Auckland has not just a legal, but a visible, obvious prostitution market. I think the age of consent there is even 16(?) yet that same teenager couldn't even buy this book on the topic of sex. It's very much just kind of ridiculous.
The country also spends just about the most in the world on its War on Drugs (per capita), so maybe it's no wonder the police didn't have the time when one friendly traveller at a hostel got his orbital bone broken by some local thugs, or when at another hostel someone had their backpack stolen.
It's probably best to not draw attention to yourself when crossing borders. i.e., don't wear a giant tail when talking to border guards.
Then you get detained. Indefinitely if they believe you to be lying.
Do you think they'll let you go with this excuse?
The phones were later returned and showed signs that the SIM cards had been replaced, he said. Giving up the contents of his private phone would be akin to a doctor giving up confidential patient information, he said.
“I’m not going to open my phone for any other country,” Mr. Ou, a New York Times contributor who was an intern for the news organization in 2010, said in a phone interview on Thursday from Nunavut, Canada. “I can’t be expected to do the same for the U.S.”
Jason Givens, a United States Customs and Border Protection spokesman, declined to comment on Mr. Ou’s case, citing privacy laws.'
citing privacy laws
It's the first experience foreigners have in our country, and we make it one of the worst experiences in the developed world.
Industries that benefit from tourism should lobby the Federal Government to improve the travel experience to, from, and within the US. I personally would fly at least a few more times a year if the TSA/CBP process treated people with urgency and dignity.
How can so many employees be so incredibly inefficient!? For some, it was pretty obvious: they were just standing around doing literally nothing while people were clearly frustrated by lines that did not move for long periods of time. Some of the “officers” were wandering the area with no apparent end goal. One (as usual) was bellowing ridiculous instructions with fear-of-death seriousness: a job that any sane manager should have eliminated years ago to save money.
And every time, it freaks me out: I don’t want my laptop stolen (say) but there is zero attention paid to the people walking up and walking away with bags from the conveyor belt on the other side, and when the line grows longer and longer I CAN’T go over there and keep adequate watch on my things. Invariably, my bag and stuff makes it through LONG before I do and I just have to hope it hasn’t disappeared.
The entire system is insane. Every Last Rule they introduced based on some random threat or other is pointless. The only thing worse than these pointless rules is knowing that these employees will freak the hell out over every violation of their pointless rules, while completely ignoring real threats.
The experience that made most upset is when my parents were leaving and I was saying goodbye to them. They are in their 70s and don't speak much English. My mom was trying to say thank you and smile at the ticket agent. And he marked her ticked with a bunch of red "S" letters. I knew what that meant.
Next thing, I was helplessly watching my parents being harassed by TSA agents, a bunch 20 year old punks. They were pulling and tugging at them, my mom almost in tears not understanding what they want from them. Made them empty all the luggage and such.
The thing is they are used to that treatment but just in their country not here What upset them is that they had to lower their expectation of how this country treats its visitors as well.
Not only was a lot of the signage and printed instructions only in English, the customs officers were down right berating people in English (many of whom obviously didn't speak English) for things they had no way of knowing, like standing in the proper line, because they couldn't read or speak English. In many cases the customs officer would simply lead people (who had no idea where they were going) into a line, then leave. The wait for translators was hours in some cases. And if you were lucky enough to get through customs, you were rushed through another security line and required to put your bags on one of five conveyer belts to the bowels of the airport to be screened AGAIN (even if you weren't taking a connecting flight). Only you had no idea which belt you were supposed to choose because there was no signage, only a scant few attendants yelling out which belt you were supposed to put your bags on (in English, of course) while streams of people rushed by.
The contrast between entering other civilised countries and entering the United States is one of the things I hate about travelling. Every other country I visit manages to control its borders and have a pleasant, polite entry process, but not my own! I've seen border agents scream and holler at people who clearly don't understand English: there's just no excuse for that. It's rude.
The United States and Europe are political units of approximately the same population and area; there's no reason why entry into the U.S. must be so much more miserable than entry in the E.U., any more than there's a reason why we Americans pay such relatively high taxes for such relatively little in services.
I don't know the particulars of this incident, so I won't comment on it. The man's not a citizen, so he certainly doesn't have a right to enter, but I do think that the border exception to the Fourth Amendment is terrible, and that requiring citizens to share the contents of their electronic devices without a warrant is an invasion of privacy.
U. S., OTOH, I dread and I'm a citizen.
My theory is I think it's almost a relief when border police deal with a fellow Canadian. If it's someone from the US I bet 99% of their worry is they have a gun.
But US customs seem to have a chip on their shoulder as if they want to torment you.
I've had the Canadian border agents accuse me of trying to smuggle in a car to sell (depending on the exchange rate it can be profitable). I've also had them grill me as to why I'm coming to Canada. "Who are you meeting? What will you be doing?". I'm Canadian, you have to let me in!
On the US side, it's mostly "Welcome home!" even though I only had a green card. There was one time when a CBP officer got testy wanting to know who owned the car while my wife was driving. It was more his foul mood than anything.
Logically, you'd expect the US agents to grill me considering I'm not a citizen, not the Canadians.
That said, the US and Canadian border agents work very closely together. They share their lists of "suspects" and are more than willing to hand someone over to the other side if it makes their life easier.
Another comment said that since this happened in a Canadian airport, the guy should have just left. I'm pretty sure the US CBP would have let their Canadian colleagues know about this guy and he wouldn't have made it out of the aiport.
They had to verify the address (surprise, some streets start with the number 1, who would've thought?) and then another officer gave us the needed visa and let us into the country, all the while the original officer was glaring at us as if we somehow managed to find a loophole to gain entry into the country.
Is it Texas? I think they gave up on that last year:
Plenty of articles about it online. I used to be involved with organising meetings for scientists, and we'd never arrange one in the USA because of the hostility towards foreigners, particularly from Africa.
Seemed like an easy decision when getting my visa and every time I reenter.
Like, how hard is it to do a basic 2 hour training in "communicating with non english speakers" so you can stop your staff insulting and screaming at non-native speakers?
It's controversial, cause it hurts tourism and business.
I've visited Brazil with a U.S. passport at least once per year since 2003, most recently in December 2015, and have never been fingerprinted.
No, but they might link you to real crimes that you didn't actually commit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield
Having a huge database encourages this kind of sweeping searches, wherein false positives become very likely.
Edit: is there anyone else systematically keeping track? You can get good information on FlyerTalk, but it seems to be a one-off kind of thing (asking a particular question about a particular country at a particular moment).
In Canada most of the major international airports have US border crossings inside the airport inside Canadian territory. In my experience those are strangely the most hostile and confrontational to Canadians. I've found land border guards, and guards inside US airports themselves to be friendlier. I don't know why, but it seems others have this experience too.
In any case given the change of political tide in the US I will no longer be traveling there for pleasure. Only for work.
If the device is powered off it requires a complete pass phrase to decrypt and is not susceptible to cold boot attacks. Beyond that I will adamantly refuse to turn over my passwords to ANYONE, EVER. Anybody who has a legitimate need to bypass my authentication has the ability to do so without my passwords (ala SSO at work). If that ends up with me being unjustly imprisoned, I will fight that battle when it happens.
My findings though are there are two types of border agents that ask inanely stupid things like having you login to a device. The first are bullies on a power trip. These guys will make spurious claims and try to hold you to them, hopefully their supervisors are more reasonable or things go South fast.
The second type are wheedling opportunists. These guys will ask for unreasonable things as an opening to negotiate a large bribe or because they think you'll play along and let them display a power trip to their nearby cronies. If you're adamant and serious, they'll usually just not target you.
The fact this sort of behavior is becoming commonplace in the "more civilized" parts of the world is truly worrisome though. Corruption in most Western governments tends to be at the top, not officers taking bribes. That means this behavior has the full backing of the law (or at least some semblance) and you play a real risk of your entire life being ruined if you don't comply. Personally I still plan to refuse and not give in, but that's not a reasonable choice for most people in this situation. The whole thing is disgusting.
I have the laptop I'm currently working on, and then I have a specialized "travel" laptop that contains nothing. It is pretty much a basic Linux laptop that contains an unencrypted volume containing a basic workstation. We're talking netbook level of sophistication. Same goes with the phone. I have a Dual SIM device that I use when traveling, and it has no email creds or anything on it. Both devices could get cooked and I will just be out a shitty computer and phone. (I also have "China only" devices, but that's a special case.) They contain basic applications I need to use when traveling and that's all.
If I really need one of my work machines and I can't get data from it in country, I will just EMS it to my hotel before I get on the plane.
Border crossings are hostile territory. Take as little as you need for your trip, and don't take any electronic device you will feel bad forfeiting to border patrol or being compromised when it gets taken "in the back room". Assume anything you have on you will be stolen from you or used against you to get a bribe. Doesn't matter if it's North America or South America, Southeast Asia or the Middle East.
US Citizens, Phones stolen, detained without explanation, and officers refused to give names.
"OTM producer Sarah Abdurrahman, her family, and her friends were detained for hours by US Customs and Border Protection on their way home from Canada. Everyone being held was a US citizen, and no one received an explanation. Sarah tells the story of their detainment, and her difficulty getting any answers from one of the least transparent agencies in the country."
It's an audio podcasts, but there are transcript as well.
More on the subject.
What does "lawfully" even mean in this context? It's one of those words used specifically to excuse legally questionable practices at best, and outright illegal or unethical behavior by people in positions of authority, like parallel construction and evidence suppression.
You can say we lawfully performed a civil forfieture. Or lawfully detained a suspect for 8 months.
The courts have helpfully manufactured justifications for violating them though, just as any tyrant would.
It is truly scary how bad things have gotten just under Obama, someone who campaigned for "change" and disclosure.
With Trump, a man who has been extremely litigious against journalist who cover him negatively, it's terrifying to consider how much worse things can get.
One can only hope our judicial system is ready to stand up to these challenges in the next four years because I'm not sure what other support we'll have, and they have already been pretty awful protecting press freedom...
Even if it is, have you noticed how little regard the extreme right has for the judicial branch? They claim to be constitutionalists while ignoring any interpretations (or citations) that don't support their position on any given issue.
I know that the ACLU and EFF have fought to defend Americans from having their laptops/phones inspected at the border, but I believe I read they haven't had much success in the legal system.
I still don't understand the rationale behind being able to inspect someones computer/mobile phone. Even in the case of say, possessing child pornography, I would assume most people are caught by tracked websites than random searches at the border?
In legal situations, this pops up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace,_order,_and_good_governm...
Don't forget Canada is very homogeneous and they are just as likely to fall victim to "other-ing" and fear mongering.
If you are fitting in, you're ok in Canada. If you arent, well no end of troubles awaits you. Just ask all the queer bookstores that had their shipments endlessly fucked with by the border/customs agents.
Canada isn't quite a liberal nirvana, they just happen to have less crime and single payer healthcare.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights ...
The government may not respect your rights, but you still have them.
Frankly, entering the country should be a much more transparent process - and barring something I dont know, I see no reason why this journalist should have been denied entry, other than someone at the border got a hair up their ass about it.
> “Keeping America safe and enforcing our nation’s laws in an increasingly digital world depends on our ability to lawfully examine all materials entering the U.S.,” Mr. Givens said in a statement on Thursday.
People who say this fail to realize they are the threat.
I don't think they care, honestly.
Android isn't encrypted, is it? You can encrypt it BUT say goodbye to your pattern-based login, you'll have to type a password on the Qwerty keyboard every time. So, I don't think anyone enables encryption on Android.
You can encrypt with different passphrases at boot and login time, too.
Since those screenings are on Canadian territory, us agents do not have police powers or the right to detain people. They can deny entry but people can leave at any time unless they have violated Canadian law. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_border_preclea...)
If this was the case, he could have simply left the airport at any time.
I knew it was a lot but I didn't guess two thirds. That makes it laughable.
There is a high probability of aggressive mass action within the US under the banner of 'border security' in the not-very distant future which is going to force people to choose sides.
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/terms Section 4, number 8:
"You will not share your password (or in the case of developers, your secret key), let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account."
"To protect your Google Account, keep your password confidential. You are responsible for the activity that happens on or through your Google Account. Try not to reuse your Google Account password on third-party applications."
"Please safeguard your password to the Services, make sure that others don't have access to it, and keep your account information current."
I'm in the U.S. Today -- for the first time in quite some time -- I went to the post office to mail a small box to an old friend in Belgium. Five paperback books and an inexpensive ceramic dish with a catchy/inspiring quote on it. $38 worth of gifts. Weighed in at 3 lbs, 10 oz.
I'm used to being able to mail something like that for, I don't know, $15 -$20. Maybe $25.
Today, the cheapest option they have for such a thing is "first class". $50. For less than four pounds, in a small cardboard box.
The postal clerk told me she herself has been shocked by the increases. The supposed explanation: "Security."
As I commented elsewhere, it's almost like they don't want us to have international family and friends, anymore.
"Why, yes; that 151 foot copper lady standing between New York and Jersey, what's'erface."
the maintenance of physical borders is not only about the physicality of keeping people out, but ideas and expression, the conceptual border guard, too
However, I don't deny that it is at times necessary for Customs officers to be more strict. I would rather the officers do their jobs correctly and prevent incidents (drug smuggling, terrorism etc.) from happening.
Although at times they do seem to be unnecessarily aggressive.
Ambassador bridge is constantly a positive experience for us but Rainbow bridge my wife(Australian) always gets grilled rudely.
I have a feeling with all this ugly Nationalism starting to rear its head in the world, journalists publishing unpopular opinions towards the mainstream Zeitgeist are going to be vulnerable to witch hunts.
Freedom of the press means reporters can publish whatever they like. The CBP isn't stopping him from doing that. It certainly doesn't mean that reporters are free from searches that the average citizen has to put up with.
Second, yes I agree the border police take things too far. However, I resent the "but you're taking away the freedom of the press" hyperbole.
Sorry, just because you're a journalist doesn't mean you get a free pass at the borders. Maybe that should be the focus of the story?
Compare this to the many countries I visited on vacation and while some, for example China, have similarly strict and high levels of security, none of them made me feel like I was some sort of terrorist. It makes me wonder what sort of training the security staff goes through. Are they taught to treat people like this? Or are people skills simply not a requirement for a job that requires talking to people all day?
I use Signal for txts, and while I believe it does not store plaintext txts on the SIM card (haven't analyzed it), SSDs strew cleartext data all over the place. Border guards using a disk imager like EnCase or something similar would get significant fragments of browser and communications history.
Key thing is if you have an iPhone, don't use TouchID, or as I call it, "Apple Bad Touch," because they can just hold you down and run your finger over it.
It's best to travel with a burner. Maybe we need a cyanogenmod image that includes a "duress key" like TC had, and old RSA tokens, but if there is anything on your phone that could be used against people you know, don't take it across borders.
There's a weird "OMG A JOURNALIST WAS HASSLED!" angle to the story that, frankly, smells of aristocratic entitlement. Journalists aren't some superior class entitled to swan about the world freely while us filthy plebeians wait in line for toilet paper; at least in America, they're citizens with no more -- and no fewer -- rights than anyone else, and that's the way it should be. The First Amendment is for every citizen, not just those who've managed to get credentials with someone.
Indeed, anyone advocating a reduction to border search insanity is likely harming their cause by linking it to journalists in particular, since journalists are such a widely despised group. There's going to be a nonzero number of people who are going to hear about a journalist being given trouble at the border, even unjustly, and think "good," not "wow, that could happen to me."
The border problems journalists have are mostly not connected to their 1st amendment rights (which, after all, only operate for journalists inside the US) but are about protecting sources.
Many of the US states have laws to protect journalistic materials and journalist's sources.
seems like it'd be smarter these days to be more covert about your photojournalism career; might be smart to have a cover.
also standing rock is reaching a boiling point. it's obviously becoming a national security issue if they're stopping people at the border.