Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Laptops Can Be Searched At the Border

Posted by kdawson on Tue Apr 22, 2008 01:51 PM
from the don't-need-no-stinkin'-suspicion dept.
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.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Hardware: US District Ct. Says Defendant Must Provide Decrypted Data 767 comments
An anonymous reader writes "If you're planning on traveling internationally with a laptop, consider the following: District Court Overturns Magistrate Judge in Fifth Amendment Encryption Case. Laptop searches at the border have been discussed many times previously. This is the case where a man entered the country allegedly carrying pornographic material in an encrypted file on his laptop. He initially cooperated with border agents during the search of the laptop then later decided not to cooperate citing the Fifth Amendment. Last year a magistrate judge ruled that compelling the man to enter his password would violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Now in a narrow ruling, US District Judge William K. Sessions III said the man had waived his right against self-incrimination when he initially cooperated with border agents." sohp notes that "the order is not that he produce the key — just that he provide an unencrypted copy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • I Wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OS24Ever (245667) * <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Tuesday April 22 2008, @01:52PM (#23160968) Homepage Journal
    It makes you wonder that if there hadn't been something like Child Porn on there if this would have been overruled.

    If it'd been a violation of rights search where they searched and you sued just for that with no criminal conviction.

    The sad part, is this sets a president if it is allowed to stand, and whittles away at everything else.
    • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

      by the_skywise (189793) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:00PM (#23161090)
      It makes you wonder if Slashdot would've even posted something like this if it didn't involve computers...
      FTFA:

      "Arnold has failed to distinguish how the search of his laptop and its electronic contents is logically any different from the suspicionless border searches of travelers' luggage that the Supreme Court and we have allowed," wrote Justice Diarmuid O'Scannlain.
      Is searching the files on a laptop when entering the country any different from searching paper files in a briefcase at the border?
      • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:03PM (#23161150)
        You can't carry drugs or bombs on a hard disk.
      • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Interesting)

        by voice_of_all_reason (926702) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:34PM (#23161710)
        Is searching the files on a laptop when entering the country any different from searching paper files in a briefcase at the border?

        Well actually, yeah. Depending on how meticulous the person is, it can have any or all of these things:

        -Proprietary or confidential information for any company you've ever worked for (regardless of whether or not it was a good idea to have saved that)
        -Elaborate summary of your fantasies (porn folder)
        -Logs of all personal correspondence or hobbies you've stored electronically (newsletters you've received or published, emails, instant messages, message board subscribed to, etc)
        -Financial information (tax forms, bank account records)
        -History of anything you've purchased online (from email, or logging into sites via the cookie on your machine)
        -Political, cultural, or sexual leanings (via browser bookmarks)

        That's alot of stuff to be available on demand, huh? What about making an image of the hard drive for later perusal? It's not like you have to worry about that kind of thing being lost/stolen/hacked form wherever warehouse it gets dumped at.
    • 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.
        • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Interesting)

          by whyde (123448) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:28PM (#23161622)
          This previous topic [slashdot.org] seemed to cover it pretty well. Not only do they assert the right to search, they assert the right to make a copy of your computer's contents as you pass through customs.

          I wonder if the right to search your physical belongings is limited in any way, or whether they assert the right to make a photocopy of any printed document that you may have with you. Imaging taking your personal journal or diary along on a trip and having someone insist that they must photocopy it to pass through customs. How are your "papers and effects" a perceived threat to anyone while traveling, and how can one be secure in them anymore?
    • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Funny)

      by Z00L00K (682162) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:07PM (#23161226) Homepage
      Time for all of us to let our laptops boot up into obscure korean, sami or other languages when they are going to inspect them. Maybe a power supply requiring a 400VAC feed too - and no battery :-)

      Odd operating systems like AROS or text only interfaces may also do well. You just can't fail the nerdity test then!

    • Re:I Wonder (Score:5, Funny)

      by Teckla (630646) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:10PM (#23161298)

      The sad part, is this sets a president if it is allowed to stand, and whittles away at everything else.

      The Supreme Court doesn't set presidents, they set precedents.

      Oh, wait...

  • by Kandenshi (832555) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @01:57PM (#23161040)
    How deeply can/do they search a laptop while I'm waiting to get on my plane?

    I know encryption gets their panties in a twist, but suppose I have data I want kept private is just burying it in a weird location good enough?
    What are they actually looking for, and how would they be searching for it? Unlikely to get them disclosing said techniques publicly, so... Rampant speculation? :P
    • by peipas (809350) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:00PM (#23161106)
      And that's the thing. Like the last /. discussion on this, if your hard drive is encrypted can they compel you to provide access as a condition for allowed travel?

      What about employees of organizations/in professions that are legally required to protect information?
    • by gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:06PM (#23161196) Homepage

      How deeply can/do they search a laptop while I'm waiting to get on my plane?

      Well, they're not really limited by when your plan leaves.

      They will hold you until they're done with you -- if you don't make your flight, that's not their problem, really.

      I know encryption gets their panties in a twist, but suppose I have data I want kept private is just burying it in a weird location good enough?

      They don't feel you have any right to privacy when crossing the boarder. Any attempt to maintain privacy is clearly an attempt to evade detection.

      People who are evading detection clearly have something to hide, and merit further questioning.

      You really are fsck'd either way. And, in the end, they could just keep the laptop anyway if they choose.

      Cheers
    • 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.
  • 4th Amendment... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Delwin (599872) * on Tuesday April 22 2008, @01:58PM (#23161054)
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. " I can see them checking your person before getting on a plane to make sure you're not carrying weapons... but what on your laptop could possibly endanger an airplane?
    • by Kohath (38547) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:18PM (#23161464)
      You don't have a 4th Amendment right to cross the US border.

      As a condition of allowing you to cross the border, you are subject to search. It is as simple as that.

      All governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders.
        • by Kohath (38547) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:32PM (#23161688)
          I'm not seeing what your point is. You can cross the border and be searched. Or you can not cross the border and not submit to a search.

          Are you saying you were flying along and accidentally encountered the US border?
      • 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 Solandri (704621) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:18PM (#23161474)

        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.
        I agree, but that reasoning only works for physical goods. If I'm trying to smuggle cocaine into the U.S., then yeah searching me at the border could stop me. But we're talking about data - ones and zeros. If I'm trying to smuggle it into the U.S., I don't need to carry it on my laptop, I could just email it to someone already in the U.S. Or leave it on a server outside the U.S., enter the U.S., open an SSH tunnel to the server, and ftp the files over.
    • 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.
    • 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 gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:30PM (#23161652) Homepage

      I imagine there's some thinly-parsed definition about whether or not you're officially on US soil when you're entering Customs and, therefore, whether the Fifth Amendment could be said to apply.

      Heck, Gonzales once issued a statement once saying that people who haven't cleared customs technically are neither in nor out of the US, and therefore have no actual rights (can't dredge up a reference now). He's certainly said that habeus corpus [sfgate.com] isn't actually a right.

      Basically, for a while at least, the legal opinion was that you could be arbitrarily and indefinitely detained without recourse. You're so far removed from the 5th Amendment at that point, it's not funny!!

      Unless things change, you have shockingly few rights at the border -- at least until a court clarifies things.

      Cheers
      • 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
    • 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).
      • Re:Time to think (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:23PM (#23161536) Journal
        Funny though, our stature in the world seems to be declining along with our freedom. Eventually we'll have none of either left, and the world will continue without us.
        • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 22 2008, @02:37PM (#23161768)
          Your making mine eyes to bleeding.

          It came about because people are too lazy to take responsibility for themselves. They want the government to do it all. So it obliges (?) and once that happens, they start complaining that their rights are being taken away.

          When you cry, "think of the children," another right is taken away.