The Orwellian Department of Homeland Security claims that it can indefinitely confiscate laptops and iPods from law abiding citizens without any provocation or justification. The Department “clarified” their policies after several business travelers started asking the press why Homeland Security was fiddling with their laptops and PDAs for months on end.
DHS officials said the newly disclosed policies — which apply to anyone entering the country, including U.S. citizens — are reasonable and necessary to prevent terrorism. Officials said such procedures have long been in place but were disclosed last month because of public interest in the matter.
Civil liberties and business travel groups have pressed the government to disclose its procedures as an increasing number of international travelers have reported that their laptops, cellphones and other digital devices had been taken — for months, in at least one case — and their contents examined.
The policies state that officers may “detain” laptops “for a reasonable period of time” to “review and analyze information.” This may take place “absent individualized suspicion.”
The policies cover “any device capable of storing information in digital or analog form,” including hard drives, flash drives, cellphones, iPods, pagers, beepers, and video and audio tapes. They also cover “all papers and other written documentation,” including books, pamphlets and “written materials commonly referred to as ‘pocket trash’ or ‘pocket litter.’ “
Reasonable measures must be taken to protect business information and attorney-client privileged material, the policies say, but there is no specific mention of the handling of personal data such as medical and financial records.
Senator Kickass Feingold (D-WI), sponsor of the unrelated Arbitration Fairness Act, plans to introduce legislation to require “reasonable suspicion” for border searches.
Defending the searches, Secretary Chertoff wrote in an Op-Ed that “the most dangerous contraband is often contained in laptop computers or other electronic devices.” He added that “searches have uncovered “violent jihadist materials” as well as images of child pornography.”
Just imagine what draconian Torquemada-esque searches they’ll devise once they realize even more ‘dangerous’ and ‘violent’ material lurks within people’s minds.
Travelers’ Laptops May Be Detained At Border [Washington Post]
(AP Photo/Mike Derer)
More From Consumerist
-
U.S. Border Officials Now Screening Some Travelers At Foreign Airports
-
Homeland Security Hoping To Find Device To Replace Pat-Downs
-
Standing In A Long Line At The Airport Right Now? You Can Maybe Blame Sequestration
-
TSA Chief Admits He Could’ve Rolled Out The Knives On Planes Policy In A Better Way
-
TSA Detains Sick, Wheelchair-Bound 12-Year-Old Claiming She Tested Positive For Bomb Residue
If a person has given proper grounds of suspicion, by all means, take their stuff. But if they are taking things *without* just cause, that is seriously screwed up, and needs to stop right away…
i’m very confused….isn’t it easier to send data out of the country via the internet?
I suppose my tactic (when I travel abroad) will be to ensure the machine I bring with me is completely devoid of data and that any data I input with said machine is copied to some net resource such as emailing to my Google account any pictures or information that I wish to keep safe.
cripes what a mess this has all become
@jgodsey: Yes. That’s part of why this makes absolutely no sense if their goal is preventing terrorism or whatever. My guess is that terrorism is the excuse and their desire to go on fishing expeditions for various reasons including possibly industrial espionage is the real motivation. For example, I’ve heard rumors that the U.S. government has assisted in espionage targeting foreign defense contractors on behalf of U.S. corporations.
@Trai_Dep: What a wonderful world it would be if the biases we have could magially be projected onto reality.
The TSA was created in a compromise Aviation and Transport Security Act by a Republican House and Democrat Senate. It was Democrats who demanded that the bill federalize the screeners (i.e. expand federal employees union membership). It was originally a part of the DOT, but was moved to Homeland Security upon that cabinet agency’s creation by, again, a Republican House and a Democrat Senate.
@Hongfiately: This story has little to do with TSA, in any case. This is the customs agencies that are seizing laptops to copy the data for no reason.
So much for probable cause
Good grief would it be admissible in court if they found all my torrent files?
@Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy:
Your arguments are disingeneous at best.
You are subject to search at the border. However you can not have your items seized without cause.
Even at the border ther govenemnt can not just take your stuff because they said so.
Even though detainment at the border required no warrant there still needs to be cause.
Considering the state of intellectual property law in this country making an eclectronic copy DOES count as a seizure. I would love to see this pay out but it most likely would result in a special exemption where it’s okay for the govenment but not citizens.
This is CLEARLY against both the constitution AND the spirit of the law you mentioned. This was never a cart blanche for unwarrented seizure of items not suspected in a crime.
I’m sorry you lack the ability to discern between a lawful detention and seizure in the course of criminal investigation and a broad series of random searches without criminal suspicion. This goes make you a prime canditate for US law enforcement.
@RabbitDinner: Yes, if making avaiable counts as infringement then torrent files will count as evidence.
@johnva: Customs… created by a Federalist Congress and signed by a Federalist President!
@TeraGram: You know it’s easier for th govenment to inspect all of the data on googles servers. There is no govenmental restriction for data stored on a corporate machine.
In addition because the internet is a packet switched network there is no reasonable expectation of privacy on that information on the way to and from google to your location.
@Hongfiately: “Customs… created by a Federalist Congress and signed by a Federalist President!
”
Dissolved by a Republican president.
There is no longer a US customs service. You can wear the old badges in public as a toy now.
I guess the US is just so wealthy now we no longer need a body to collect duties on imported goods. That was the reason the federalist govenment created them.
@Techguy1138: I agree. If a foreign terrorist illegal combatant has habeas rights, then we citizens have 4th Amendment rights. My guess is this will be subject to a quietly released clarifying order in the very near future. That said, travel as thin as possible and encrypt what you bring.
@Hongfiately: There are certain things that as a country we are defined by. Basic human rights and property rights are two of them.
The fall out from this type of behaviour is going to be very bad even though this is only a little infraction. At this point there are a number of federal agencies that are suspect in having corporate ties.
The ability for the govenemnt to legally and without question copy and store information from electronic devices leaves the US govenemnt in a vulnerable position.
What happens when a pieceof sensitive corporate information becomes stolen and a US CPB agent becomes part of the investigation? What happens of a piece of information that I am legally obligated to secure becomes public information?
What responsability does the govenemnt have in securing what they have taken? What is the recourse for a citizen if the period of search is excessively long?
Getting a warrant isn’t that hard. It is also reasonable to require suspicion for seizure. I can not understand why people rail againt having judical oversite and reason apply to the govenemnt. Depriving a person of property is a severe action for the govenemnt to take, yet people act like it’s no big deal.
People would freak out if I just started looking through their stuff for no reason but if I had a badge they’d bend over backwards to give me anything, with reason or not.
@Techguy1138: Like I said, I think this is really poor public policy for a whole host of reasons, even if it’s “legal” for them to do. I agree that this will get ugly when this power is inevitably abused.
While I haven’t travelled to the US in recent times, this is just another reason on a constantly growing list not to go there. The country treats most foreign nationals as criminals before they’ve stepped a foot off the plane… and now thinks it’s cool to erode the rights of others by being able to search and seize equipment without probable cause.
Seriously, you would think in a time of economic downturn you’d be evaluating the need for security, the risks posed and other issues against the need for more tourists and business travellers to visit and input needed cash into the economy.
I’ve made a point of emailing Sen. Feingold, as well as my countries foreign and trade ministers, because the US really needs to step down from this ‘it’s all to stop terrorism’ platform for justifying some of the most useless and pointless security measures known to man.
@thewinchester: Thanks for emailing him. I hope we can convince some more of our representatives that this sort of thing is harming our economic prospects.
This is definitely going to have a chilling effect on legitimate business travelers.
This practice needs to be stopped.
One way around this, that might work for some people, is to remove your laptop hard drive before you travel, and send it via UPS to your destination beforehand.
If your destination is a hotel, then when booking your reservation simply let the hotel staff know that a package will be arriving for you at the hotel prior to your arrival. Ask that they lock it in their safe until you check in.
You might also keep a second hard drive with only a bare-bones OS setup, plus maybe a few e-books, or some music or movies to enjoy during your trip, and pop that into your laptop before you leave. Swap it out for the other HD (that you sent ahead via UPS to your destination) when you arrive, and reverse the process when you leave. External hard drives can also be used the same way, without the need to physically swap drives.
@Techguy1138: I’m generally a lower regulation, government hands-off kind of guy. That said, I also don’t like it when it works the other way and corporations get too cozy with the federal government. A lot of people get their backs up about defense contracting, computing, and information transit/storage, etc., but look at the farm bill that bloats its way through Congress (both Democrat & Republican controlled) every few years. Corporations are big beneficiaries of crap like the ethanol mandate that has contributed to gas price spikes and caused huge hikes in food prices. Influential members of both parties from the farm states deserve our thanks for it.
But I digress…
Let me bring it back home here. You ask:
Troubling question for DHS. The WaPo article says:
Let’s say I work for a covered entity under HIPAA. I have electronic Protected Health Information on my laptop or other portable device. Let’s assume that I’m smart and that the device complies with the Security Rule and is password-protected and encrypted. Does the mere fact that my information is encrypted make it “suspicious” enough to create probable cause. I don’t think so, but some overzealous types might make that argument based on their reading of section C(2)(a) and (b) of the policy linked in the article. Even though the data is encrypted (let’s assume that it’s strong enough to avoid timely decryption), both the availability and possession of the information has been lost for a minimum of 15 days (with possible endless 7-day extensions) unless a copy exists in another place.
This wasn’t a well-thought out policy and the statement in section E(1) regarding handling of business information doesn’t provide guidance on how to do so. “… shall take all reasonable measures to protect that information from unauthorized disclosure.” doesn’t do anything to get my trusting heart pumping. “Depending on the nature of the information presented, the Trade Secrets Act, the Privacy Act, and other laws may govern or restrict the handling of the information.” Lovely. There isn’t a procedure referenced here. That means there’s not going to be a standard in place.
If I travel internationally in the future, I’m going thin all the way. I may have a laptop, but it’s not going to have any data on it. Tunneling FTW.
[Direct link to CBP Search Policy]
I would just like to point out, that it would be Customs and not TSA that would be doing this, since Customs handles people entering the country, just for all of the people thinking it’s TSA.
Umm… What total bull? They are not protecting anyone from “terrorism” stop rehashing the same thing over and over… Seriously, if you wanted to sneak data into the country, you would just use the internet and download it once you are in… Not to mention you could just ship it to your destination…
There are plenty of ways in which to conceal data storage as well. They have MP3 player watches, USB flash drive pens… The list goes on and on… Don’t forget about flash memory cards. You could hide a memory card containing such data anywhere… If any of you have seen MicroSD before, you know what I mean.
They are just using “terrorism” and “child pornography” again, as a cover to get people to go along with it. People don’t even realize they are being manipulated.
“Oh my word! That iPod has Rage Against The Machine albums! He is a terrorist!”
/files under bullshit government rules
This is way beyond protecting the public interest. Chertoff’s own comments suggest they are looking for child pornography among other things. While child pornography is disgusting and should be stopped, probable cause and a court order are required to search for such material. This material is not a danger to other passengers so simply traveling by plane should not be reason enough to subvert the constitutional process.
I miss the Constitution. I hope it comes back in 2009.
illegal search and seizure was such a concern for our founding fathers that they put it in the constitution. But hear comes our republican-style Dept of Homeland Security to steal our property. Unreal.
@johnva: Well, it is an implementation problem, and it isn’t. Your laptop is likely to be on occasionally. The reason you take it on trips is to use it. Therefore, it’s likely that the drive key has been in RAM recently if you’re coming back form a trip. True, programs could (and now SHOULD) keep keys in DRAM for as little time as possible and WIPE them afterward, but at some point, the key has to be in RAM (I’m ignoring TPM and other hardware crypto systems). You’re right – sufficient care is critical in both writing software and using it.
@eyv: According to the paper on cold boot attacks on cryptography, the keys, even if they are present in memory, only persist and are recoverable for a few seconds to a few minutes. Chilling the memory chips using canned air or liquid nitrogen can cause them to persist longer (hours), but they would have to do that immediately upon shutting down the computer for it to work. Now obviously the risks are higher if you use hibernation or sleep mode (especially the latter), since the keys could stay in memory the whole time. But if you shut down your computer completely before leaving for the airport and preferably use software that blanks the keys in memory during shutdown, you should be pretty safe against this sort of attack.
Interesting related note: I’ve read that in least one case, the government lost in federal court when someone refused to hand over an encryption key or password on the grounds that that would amount to self-incrimination. So maybe they can’t actually compel you to hand it over against your will. But I’m not sure of the actual state of the law on this, so take this with a grain of salt.
The laptop I travel with is not mine. It belongs to my company. I’m under all kinds of instructions not to reveal my password, keep the laptop secure and not allow anyone else to use it, etc. The computer is secured by password and the
data is encrypted.
So if I go through customs and the guy turns it on and asks me, “What’s the password,” how will he react when I say that the computer is not mine and I’ve been instructed not to give the password out to anyone? How will my employer feel when my computer, which may contain customer data like names, addresses, social security numbers and financial data (encrypted), ends up in the hands of Homeland Security for an indefinite period of time? Also, the laptop is my full time work computer. If they take it I’ll need another one in order to do my job.
I feel much safer.
@bishophicks: You need to find out your corporate policy on this and refuse to travel internationally until they give you an official policy to follow.
The answer of course is don’t travel with data that isn’t yours. If some tech puts crap on the machine in a service partition and the govenemnt finds it you get in trouble.
Why is everyone talking about TSA? In the article it says “U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” Not TSA. Not sure why there’s even a picture of a TSA guy looking at the laptop if the article has nothing to do with TSA.
Thank God for Remote Desktop/Terminal Services/VNC/PCAnywhere. I’ve started travelling with a very clean/generic laptop. NO programs on it other than remote access and a few basic web programs. All of my data stays safely at my datacenter regardless of where I’m at. DHS wants my laptop? Sure, go ahead, scan it…nothing on it.
Aren’t violent jihadist materials a form of constitutionally protected speech? If a laptop contains a bomb or more than two ounces of liquid, sure, confiscate it for everyone’s safety. But reading material isn’t dangerous.
Homeland Security = Police State for all Americans!
Imagine your minding your own business to come a cross a Homeland Security checkpoint not at the border just in the middle of the country. And your constitutional rights… Gone! You don’t have any.
There are more than a few things wrong with this. There are 2 main problems with this
1) “The internet is a series of tubes”
If you want to transfer any digital data you can do it over the internet just as easily. With scp, and VPN it could be arguably more secure. I’m sure any one who can find a place we internet access and get all the nasty files they didn’t want DHS to see. Until they put up the Great firewall of America this will always be a probem/solution.
2) We inspect physical good because they could be a threat to people. If someone is bringing in sawed off shotguns, then they confiscate them. They don’t confiscate the gun keep it for 3 months to see if it is 18 inches or not. This is exactly why police can search you person but not your password protected PDA on a traffic stop.
DoHS is awesome. Ha ha ha. Everyone wave to them.
People, the idea is not to stop “child porn” (OH NOOOOO CHIIILD PORN!!!!1!) or “violent jihadist materials” (violent digital files? Give me a break, Chertoff, you utter ass.) It’s transparently obvious that nothing on your laptop’s hard drive can possibly pose any danger at all to anyone at all. No, the idea is so that a pack of sleazy of mouth-breathing rednecks in wannabe-cop suits can steal your property.
My laptop is encrypted out the yingyang. Good luck decrypting it DHS.
@ZzFDKzZ: Because DHC encompasses all of those acronyms nowadays…
Unfortunately, our checks and balances have FAILED. The President is the one that came up with this BS idea creating more government beureacracy in the name of safety that only serves to suck up taxpayer money like a Kirby and trample our Constitutional Rights. The Brain-trust in congress is so afraid of the brain dead retards scared shitless of Achmed that they’ll happily go along with the plan so long as it gives them a couple more years to collect more bribes.
The courts should have been the last line of defense. But that bunch of morons think that the Constitution applies only under certain circumstances. NO! The founding fathers told King George III of England to piss off because they were “endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights” Meaning that the government has NO CASE AT ALL TO EVER TAKE THEM AWAY! That was the point of the constitution. To establish our rights as inherent and our birthright. Not graciously granted to us by Big Brother.