Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Government The Courts United States News

Laptops Can Be Searched At the Border 821

Nothing to Declare notes that a California appeals court has unanimously upheld a ruling that border security officers at international airports can search personal computers without requiring any specific evidence of criminal activity. The appeal was made by US resident Michael Timothy Arnold, charged with child pornography offenses after an airport search of his notebook PC in 2005. Might want to think hard about what's on your laptop if you're going to be passing through a US international airport.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Laptops Can Be Searched At the Border

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Cmon people (Score:5, Informative)

    by WaltBusterkeys ( 1156557 ) * on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:01PM (#23161114)
    Why are computers treated any differently than anything else?

    That's the entire point of the ruling. The government has always been able to search your bags when you cross the border, to look for drugs and guns coming into the country. That's been on the books for 200 years. The question was whether computers would be treated differently and get more protection than everything else.

    What threat does data on a computer pose to an airplane?

    It's not about getting on airplanes. This does not apply to domestic flights. It's about stuff crossing the border by any means. Presumably, this would apply just as much if you crossed the border by train or in a car.

    The case has nothing to do with airplanes. It has to do with the "border search exception" to the warrant requirement.
  • Re:Cmon people (Score:4, Informative)

    by WaltBusterkeys ( 1156557 ) * on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:02PM (#23161140)
    Sorry, missing link on preview:

    Explanation of the border search exception [wikipedia.org].
  • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Informative)

    by WaltBusterkeys ( 1156557 ) * on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:05PM (#23161168)
    The sad part, is this sets a president if it is allowed to stand, and whittles away at everything else.

    First, you mean precedent. The President is the guy at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. "Precedent" is what judges use to decide cases.

    That said, the border search exception [wikipedia.org] has always allowed the government to search your bags when you cross the border, to look for drugs, guns, agricultural products, etc. Think about passing through Customs at any international crossing -- they get to randomly pull you out of line and dump out the contents of your bag for any reason whatsoever (or no reason whatsoever) and make sure you're not smuggling anything into the country. That understanding of the Fourth Amendment has been on the books for centuries. It might be "right" or "wrong," but there's no doubt that it's been the law for ages.
  • by gethoht ( 757871 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:07PM (#23161206)
    I highly recommend using truecrypt and incorporating a hidden volume [truecrypt.org]. That way if you need to divulge a password, you can just give them one that allows access to a volume that doesn't have the sensitive data they are looking for.
  • by mr_majestyk ( 671595 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:08PM (#23161230)
    The next logical question is, if you password-protect and encrypt your hard drive to thwart precisely this kind of unwarranted and unjustifiable privacy invasion, can Customs force you to divulge your passwords?

    not YET... [news.com]
  • by WaltBusterkeys ( 1156557 ) * on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:16PM (#23161418)
    You've got two different searches confused.

    The search of people flying on any flight is an "administrative search" to look for weapons. It is strictly limited to searching for weapons--if the cops see drugs they can bust you, but they can't look for drugs or evidence of any other crime.

    This is not the same search. This is the Customs search at the border and it has nothing to do with flying. Think about going through US Customs after you land in the US. The key is that it's after you've already landed. The government has always been able to look for drugs at US Customs, which has nothing to do with airline safety. (While a couple of kilos of blow might make your flight more entertaining, it's hardly the sort of thing that makes airplanes crash).

    There's a very important difference between pre-flight safety searches (applies to any flight, domestic or international) and customs searches (applies to any means of entering the country).
  • Are you so sure? (Score:3, Informative)

    by MountainLogic ( 92466 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:16PM (#23161428) Homepage
    Check out how the border patrol is detaining people domestically in this new story [nwsource.com]
  • Re:4th Amendment... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Erioll ( 229536 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:17PM (#23161442)

    Think about going through international customs at any major airport. You go through US customs after you've already landed. The point is to control smuggling of goods into the US, not to protect airplanes.
    Depends. If flying from Canada, in many airports (Calgary at the least) you can actually pre-clear customs in Canada itself, then all flights to the USA are out of a single wing of the airport so you're essentially "in the USA" at that point, and don't need to clear after you land. Works out for everybody really. If there's a problem you're not in ANOTHER city when it happens, and the airlines themselves don't need to fly somebody BACK if there's a problem either.

    Not that it's ever happened for me. I swear when they scan my passport the screen comes up with a big message saying "BORING" and they just let me through. Which is fine with me!
  • by Spokehedz ( 599285 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:29PM (#23161646)
    There was a ruling a while back I believe in Massachusetts, but the gist was if you encrypt your laptop you do not have to give out your PGP key because it is covered under the 5th amendment.

    So... You UPS your encrypted laptop (and your clothes, shampoo, etc.) to wherever you are going and get on the airplane with as little technology as you are willing to lose when you travel.

    I fail to see how DHS or TSA are still a problem for people traveling. I've done this for years (even before the whole "OH NOES! TERRORISTS!") and I have yet to lose an article of clothing or some bit of technology when I travel.
  • by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:37PM (#23161770) Homepage
    Replying to my own post, bad form, I know ...

    So, here [www.cbc.ca] is a news article which includes the assertion that you basically have no rights.

    As a foreign national, and possibly even as a US citizen, you could find yourself with absolutely no legal rights whatsoever. I have no idea if that interpretation is still in effect or not. But, at one point, they could disappear your ass, and didn't feel like they had any real duty to protect you.

    Scary shit!!

    Cheers
  • Re:5th Ammendment? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Detritus ( 11846 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:44PM (#23161856) Homepage
    Customs officers do not need warrants, probable cause, reasonable suspicion or any of that crap. This is settled law and practice. If you went before the Supreme Court, they would laugh at you. It isn't any different in other countries. I've seen people get the contents of their luggage dumped on the floor and examined with a fine-toothed comb, just because the customs officer didn't like the way they looked.
  • by rsborg ( 111459 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:48PM (#23161922) Homepage

    This should cause a nice bump for encrypted drive/volume software.
    You do realize that OSX has a free built-in encrypted disk creation tool [apple.com] (Disk Utility). Yet another nice "sweetener" for mac switchers.

    I put all my personal sensitive data (tax, etc) in a disk image on my key drive. Looking for more "obfuscation" try this torn-cable usb drive [evilmadscientist.com].

  • Link to opinion (Score:5, Informative)

    by gothzilla ( 676407 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:52PM (#23161994)
    http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6D5D931898D8168188257432005AC9B8/$file/0650581.pdf?openelement [uscourts.gov]

    1. He was randomly chosen for secondary questioning. Perfectly legal and constitutional.

    2. He left the images on the desktop in a folder. They were not hidden.

    3. This cannot be a violation of the 4th amendment because it was a border search. Border searches have been challenged and found to be constitutional numerous times in the past.

    4. United States v. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. 149, 153 (2004). Generally, "searches made at the border . . . are
    reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border . . . ."

    Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. at 152. Therefore, "[t]he luggage carried by a traveler entering the country may
    4179 UNITED STATES v. ARNOLDbe searched at random by a customs officer . . . no matter how
    great the traveler's desire to conceal the contents may be."

    He made no attempt to conceal the images as they were left on the desktop, but even if he had attempted to conceal them it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

    5. Courts have long held that searches of closed containers and their contents can be conducted at the border without particularized suspicion under the Fourth Amendment. This includes items such as a purse, wallet, or pockets. A laptop is no different.

    6. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. at 152 (emphasis added), the Supreme Court has held open the possibility, "that some
    searches of property are so destructive as to require" particularized suspicion. Id. at 155-56 (emphasis added) (holding that complete disassembly and reassembly of a car gas tank did not require particularized suspicion).
    Since the search of his laptop did not require it to be damaged in any way, and the defendant also stated that his laptop was not damaged, it was again a legal search.

    The only way he was going to get away with this is if he had shoved a memory stick up his butt and made sure he didn't do anything that caused suspicion.
  • by itsybitsy ( 149808 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @02:52PM (#23162002)
    T.R.U.E. C.R.Y.P.T. D.O.T. O.R.G.

    LEARN TO USE TRUE CRYPT or another encryption system TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM THE PRYING EYES OF BIG BROTHER AGENTS WITH THEIR ARROGANT AGENDA OF PRIVACY VIOLATIONS. DOUBLE ENCRYPT (AT LEAST).

    From: http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/ [truecrypt.org]

    rueCrypt is a software system for establishing and maintaining an on-the-fly-encrypted volume (data storage device). On-the-fly encryption means that data are automatically encrypted or decrypted right before they are loaded or saved, without any user intervention. No data stored on an encrypted volume can be read (decrypted) without using the correct password/keyfile(s) or correct encryption keys. Entire file system is encrypted (e.g., file names, folder names, contents of every file, free space, meta data, etc).

    Files can be copied to and from a mounted TrueCrypt volume just like they are copied to/from any normal disk (for example, by simple drag-and-drop operations). Files are automatically being decrypted on-the-fly (in memory/RAM) while they are being read or copied from an encrypted TrueCrypt volume. Similarly, files that are being written or copied to the TrueCrypt volume are automatically being encrypted on-the-fly (right before they are written to the disk) in RAM. Note that this does not mean that the whole file that is to be encrypted/decrypted must be stored in RAM before it can be encrypted/decrypted. There are no extra memory (RAM) requirements for TrueCrypt. For an illustration of how this is accomplished, see the following paragraph.

    Let's suppose that there is an .avi video file stored on a TrueCrypt volume (therefore, the video file is entirely encrypted). The user provides the correct password (and/or keyfile) and mounts (opens) the TrueCrypt volume. When the user double clicks the icon of the video file, the operating system launches the application associated with the file type - typically a media player. The media player then begins loading a small initial portion of the video file from the TrueCrypt-encrypted volume to RAM (memory) in order to play it. While the portion is being loaded, TrueCrypt is automatically decrypting it (in RAM). The decrypted portion of the video (stored in RAM) is then played by the media player. While this portion is being played, the media player begins loading next small portion of the video file from the TrueCrypt-encrypted volume to RAM (memory) and the process repeats. This process is called on-the-fly encryption/decryption and it works for all file types, not only for video files.
    Note that TrueCrypt never saves any decrypted data to a disk - it only stores them temporarily in RAM (memory). Even when the volume is mounted, data stored in the volume is still encrypted. When you restart Windows or turn off your computer, the volume will be dismounted and files stored in it will be inaccessible (and encrypted). Even when power supply is suddenly interrupted (without proper system shut down), files stored in the volume are inaccessible (and encrypted). To make them accessible again, you have to mount the volume (and provide the correct password and/or keyfile).
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @03:17PM (#23162354)
    Time to keep a bootable knoppix or ubunutu livecd in your CD drive whenever you travel.

    Customs agent turns on computer and gets a nice clean OS with nothing on it to poke around in.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @03:23PM (#23162432)
    So... You UPS your encrypted laptop (and your clothes, shampoo, etc.) to wherever you are going and get on the airplane with as little technology as you are willing to lose when you travel.

    You want to send your laptop by UPS? You're a brave man! And your scheme won't work very well. When your package crosses the border, US Customs can still hold & search it, and they might charge you duty & taxes.

    Anything that crosses the border can be searched. USPS, UPS, FedEx, trucks, trains, planes, boats, shipping containers...

    If DHS really wanted to improve border security they would do something about shipping containers. Less than 5% of all containers are inspected.
  • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Informative)

    by Hemogoblin ( 982564 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @03:25PM (#23162462)
    Speaking as someone who has worked for Customs (but not in the United States), I can tell you that those are absolutely awful excuses. I guarantee you that any Customs officer will easily notice that you are lying and immediately become suspicious. This is the very LAST thing you want to happen if you were hoping to get through Customs quickly.

    Remember, Customs officers are mostly trying to find things that are out of the ordinary. Carrying a broken laptop on a business trip, or carrying a random "friend's" laptop never, EVER happens. The absolute best advice I can give regarding Customs is (1) Don't be stupid, and (2) Don't lie, ever. If you are ever caught in a lie, regardless how small and insignificant, you are fucked. Just don't do it, because it will make my life and your life easier.
  • by Futurepower(R) ( 558542 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @03:38PM (#23162650) Homepage
    "... government gets to meet its agenda."

    What happens if your laptop is encrypted? Can they tell you how it is supposed to work if the boot code is temporarily disabled? Can they expect you to supply a password? What happens if you carry the laptop hard drive in your pocket?

    The free, open source TrueCrypt [truecrypt.org] works with Windows and Linux and now encrypts the boot partition, on the fly, while the the computer is being used.
  • by unlametheweak ( 1102159 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @03:47PM (#23162760)

    What happens if your laptop is encrypted?
    They will demand encryption keys.

    If you can't supply the encryption keys (or even if you do them them the keys) they can and will (at their discretion) confiscate your laptop. This was discussed on Slashdot before IIRC.

    I'm a bit lazing with references ATM, so I will give you a general Google listing:
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=us+customs+confiscate+laptop&btnG=Search [google.com]

    From the washingtonpost.com reference:

    "This laptop doesn't belong to me," he remembers protesting. "It belongs to my company." Eventually, he agreed to log on and stood by as the officer copied the Web sites he had visited, said the engineer, a U.S. citizen who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of calling attention to himself.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @03:49PM (#23162792)
    When this first became an issue I received a company memo that gave the simple instructions:
    • The border is not the place for a debate over the constitution.
    • Cooperate with them, but don't volunteer information
    • Provide any hard drive/power-on passwords and the email password if asked, but to refuse to supply VPN login (and related) information.
    • I am to make clear the laptop is owned by the company.
    • Get a receipt if they confiscate it
  • Re:I Wonder (Score:3, Informative)

    by Hemogoblin ( 982564 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @04:06PM (#23163028)
    Ok, let me rephrase. A broken laptop can be a valid excuse, especially if it LOOKS broken.

    What I meant in my original post is that I wouldn't use the lie "my laptop is broken" if it was actually working. As I explain in my post here [slashdot.org] we only examine laptops if we're suspcious about the person anyway. Having a "broken laptop" is a little too convenient after we've been asking a bunch of probing questions, so I'd damn well make sure it's actually broken.

    Does that make sense?
  • Re:I Wonder (Score:3, Informative)

    by vidarh ( 309115 ) <vidar@hokstad.com> on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @04:27PM (#23163274) Homepage Journal
    Which would be a damn lot safer to just use scp (optional: via a third country) to transfer out. In my last job I had ssh sessions going from California to Beijing a lot of the time, and also from London to California and London to Beijing at the same time. If I had access to export restricted information and wanted to ship it somewhere, there's no way in hell I'd even remotely consider physically carrying it on me. Especially not through a US airport.
  • by tompaulco ( 629533 ) on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @04:34PM (#23163352) Homepage Journal
    And just why are you taking personal patient data around with you on a laptop in the first place?
    Because it is required in order to perform my job duties. If I was assured of a way to get access to the data I need while abroad, then I wouldn't even need to take my laptop, just make sure they had a workstation for me wherever I happened to be going.
  • Re:Umm.. CGI? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 22, 2008 @05:29PM (#23163942)
    Not in the US [cnn.com]

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Working...