It may sound as if I'm asking out of doubt, but rather, I'm asking to see if my hunch that CBP is equally as reckless and uncaring in front of a camera as e.g. other law enforcement agencies.
To the point they don't even like you texting your travel companions inquiring about the delay. Because of these horror stories, I use my phone's ability to disable the TouchID reader forcing the 18 character pass code to be used when returning to the US. On entry of a foreign country, I shut it down completely.
This is certainly not the first article of its kind, and the legality of such action seems to be upheld in court (at least the use of search without a warrant at the border).
So, the selfish question then is: How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches? Is there a way I can present my phone such that it drops into a mode that contains no data? Do I need to back my phone up before traveling, wipe it for the border crossing, and then restore once I feel safe?
It feels crazy to ask this question, as an American citizen, but HN, what do you do to protect your data at the American border?
Don't forget that the border zone extends 100 miles in from the actual border (including the great lakes). Most US people live their entire lives in the constitution free zone where this kind of violation is allowed.
There is no actual country border at any airport. It's an approximation that has its own rules and is not affected by the international treaty that sets these 100 miles.
I'm not sure which treaty you're thinking of, but I'm pretty certain it's a purely domestic matter. Note that we're talking about 100 miles inland from the border, not something like 100 miles out to sea.
The "most people" actually comes from the part he left out... it's not just 100 miles from any border, it's 100 miles from any international airport, which does include most people.
IIRC the "100 miles from an airport" part was requested/proposed but never actually happened (presumably because the FBI gang didn't want the CBP gang on it's turf).
However the authority using "border zone" justification for a warrantless search must also have probable cause to believe you have recently crossed the border.
Now, if you leave the possibility that somebody crosses the border unchecked - you can use your incompetence to gain the right to search anybody. Nice one.
>So, the selfish question then is: How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches? Is there a way I can present my phone such that it drops into a mode that contains no data? Do I need to back my phone up before traveling, wipe it for the border crossing, and then restore once I feel safe?
Save your encrypted system configuration/data on a service. Leave all your devices behind. Buy new devices on the other side of the border, and restore from the encrypted backup. This is really the only way to completely sidestep the risk.
> How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches
knows plenty of technical solutions.
The question which needs to be answered in political terms is about the conditions under which it is lawful to put pressure on individuals to warrant such a search.
As silly as this sounds, it was standard procedure for one company I worked with. Don't bring your phone, get one from the US office. Same with laptops.
Didn't half speed up border crossings when your itinerary is a week and all you have are your clothes, your passport, some travel money and your tickets.
Then you can deny you have one, and they won't be able to prove anything. Or you can have two, and then give them the one with a porn collection or something. Or you can have three, in case they suspect you of having two.
Or you just have none, and they detain you indefinitely because you can't prove otherwise… though if you fear that, you probably shouldn't cross the border ever again.
I was wondering what they'd do if they ask for my Facebook account credentials, and I explain to them I have no Facebook account. Will I be detained for lying to an officer of the law? I don't have a Facebook account, but they might not believe me.
As you may have learned in recent news, lying to a Federal officer is a felony. If you have a blank phone, and you tell them you have no backup, and they later find out you did, you could go to prison just for that alone.
And what if you do have a Facebook account, but don't know its password because it's only on a password manager application on your home computer? Or what if you need two-factor authentication to login, but left the device with the second factor at home?
This is the real answer. The problem is that the government feels entitled to any data they may request of you. Regardless of your technical acumen, they can always fall back on a $5 wrench.
> Until a court rules that they can ask for your encrypted remote backup because reasons.
Is there legal precedence for this though? I thought the law (and precedence) was that they can only search what you are carrying with you at the point of entry?
A lot of companies (US and foreign) will send encrypted laptop computers with employees going to the US, and the employees don't get the key. The key will be provided over the phone when, and only when, they arrive at their destination (usually a customer site), and if everything at that time is ok.
This is simply to avoid having company intellectual property stolen (because that's what a copy will do).
It's not contempt or lying to an officer if you really don't have the key, and even if you called home from the airport you wouldn't get one.
This has been quite common for the last decade at least.
For mobile devices there are apps that will pretend to be something innocuous (say, a clock, or a flashlight app), and actually work as hidden storage. It would depend on whether the agents are using computerized inspection or manually looking through your phone (as they could easily build a blacklist of such apps), but if they're doing it manually and the app really does do the function it suggests it does and has a hidden unlock mechanism, they won't detect it.
For laptops, you can install multiple operating systems and simply set the BIOS or EFI bootloader to boot the dummy one by default when going to the airport and make sure the dummy hides the partitions of the real one. Once again, this will fool manual inspection, but not computerized. Fooling computerized inspection would require placing the real encrypted file system within the dummy one, without any headers indicating that it's a file system: much more complicated and can lead to data loss if the dummy system writes over it.
Either way, you don't want to simply wipe everything and restore once you're across borders if you actually want to cross. For one, there's the chance they'll just confiscate your device, but if you're not a citizen of the country you're entering, they'll just deny you entry on suspicion. You want something that's fake, but convincing, which takes effort.
"Why is your phone completely blank? What are you trying to hide? Give me your Facebook login or you're going nowhere. Okay thanks, but you're still going nowhere... and your flight just left. That'll be $2000 for a new ticket."
But a smartphone is not blank. What does 'blank' mean really? It's choke full of apps, whether you want them or not, from the factory. If you just use it to call with (as I do), then the only activity is a shortish call log.
I'd expect a response along the lines of this if I presented a factory-erased phone to CBP...
"Everyone has a Facebook sir, even my grandma and my boss. And I'm pressing buttons on your cellphone and it's asking me to set things up, so it's obvious you wiped it and have something to hide. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. Either you start being honest with me, or you're not catching that flight, or any flight. Ever."
Well, sir, I'm glad you asked. I just upgraded for this trip and am very excited to try out the new camera as it's supposed to be about two times better than the last model I had. I'm planning on setting everything up on my flight. I do not have a facebook account. I got tired of the data breaches and privacy issues and closed it about a year and a half ago. Am I free to go?
Assuming you do indeed have a FB account, the scene continues like this.
(Officer opens his laptop, searches your name on Facebook and finds someone with your name from the city you live in and your mug as their profile picture).
“Sir, you’re under arrest for the felony crime of lying to a Federal law enforcement agent. You have the right to remain silent...”
They can also make up imaginary charges against you to have you jailed, as cops in the US love to do. Any time an innocent person is gunned down, there's inevitably a story about how they 'charged the officer' or had a weapon or whatever, and then when evidence appears to contradict that, the lie is quietly retracted.
You might say 'well, I have my ID while traveling, so it's fine', but ID is not always considered proof of citizenship. They could drag you aside at security (or elsewhere), decide they don't like the look of you, and decide that your ID isn't proof that you're a citizen. Spend a week or two in jail.
People in those other countries don't have a right to complain. If you have something incriminating in many countries you just disappear, possibly after a show trial.
There's no perfect security, and biolocks are absolutely useless for protecting phone access, especially in the US where they have zero 4th Amendment protection.
There are almost no technical solutions. A freshly wiped phone or any clever encryption gimmick can raise suspicion and make things worse.
AFAIK companies are the exception, unsurprisingly. Some companies require laptop and phone wiping before travel, and if you can prove you are following company policy it might be OK.
They can obviously be as suspicious as they like to but they can be like that anyway. If they choose to believe you have two Facebook accounts, one to show to authorities and the other to plan terrorist attacks with, then how can you prove them wrong.
Don't carry any passwords with you so you can not login any service or device even if you wanted to. Leave them at home. A good reason to wipe your stuff prior your journey would be to minimise trouble if your equipment got stolen or lost (a plausible threat when travelling).
I would tend to think there's nothing you can do to prevent them getting suspicious if they choose to do so. It's a bit unfair because it's a situation where you can't count on anything even if you have nothing to hide but that's, to my knowledge, just how it is.
Most Americans don't protect their data, because most Americans aren't potentially going to be set up by their government to be made to look like some kind of terrorist.
If you happen to be non-white or non-christian or have such as family or who live in a majority Muslim country, then you probably do want to protect yourself against this eventuality. In that case, either bring a dumb/brick phone for them to search, or bring a smartphone which has data on it, but nothing you care about. Don't jump through a lot of hoops to try to fool them, because it'll look suspicious, and then you really aren't going to make your flight.
A 'blame the victim' mentality gives breathing space to the bully. 'Blame the bully' and at least they might apply some discretion, to counter negative attention to themselves or their superiors. Enforcement jobs, including border patrol, can self-select for sadists and racists, so it's probably best the public remains vigilant to the prospect of their increasing power.
Of course it would be better if the "bully" was removed or reformed.
However, until that happens (which might be never), it's prudent to protect yourself, and telling people that they must take precautions for their own safety and well-being is not "blaming the victim".
White Americans just have lower odds. But it only takes the border control officer to find something "suspicious" like a video about nuclear bombs in your youtube history and now you might just be a rotten apple. What you think is fine and what law enforcers think can be quite different.
I'm not saying you should live in fear, just that these kind of checks are not good for anyone. Not even if you carry your sweater over your shoulders.
> It feels crazy to ask this question, as an American citizen, but HN, what do you do to protect your data at the American border?
I guess the real (rhetorical) question is, are you doing this for the principle of the thing or because you have something illegal? If the latter, then the only foolproof way is to travel without a phone, purchase a burner when you get wherever you're going, then destroy it when you leave - it's cheap enough these days to do so for every trip.
If the former, then (as much as I hate this) just accept that it's all theatre and nobody really cares what's on your phone, and just unlock it and let them nose through your happy snaps for a minute on the way through.
> let them nose through your happy snaps for a minute on the way through.
Just so you know, that's not how it has worked since 2013. Now they take your phone to the back room and image your phone. Then they upload that image to a service that searches your data. Then, and there is recent evidence of this, they don't always destroy the local copy of your data in the field office which would allow agents to browse your data at any time. Remember, they require you to unlock (decrypt) your phone before doing this.
I hate this idea. To the best of my knowledge there's no evidence of anything illegal on my phone or any of my social media accounts. But still, I would absolutely loathe the idea of handing over an image of my phone in perpetuity. Might as well give you a scan of the contents of my brain. Not much evidence of law-breaking there either, but I'd rather hold onto it, thank you!
>>It feels crazy to ask this question, as an American citizen, but HN, what do you do to protect your data at the American border?
In reality you can't without (potentially) causing yourself massive problems. Missing flights, detained for longer because you are hiding something because of wiped drives, encryption etc. etc. Oh, and they might add your name to lists that make your life miserable every-time you fly. So, unless a court rules in our favor, we're screwed.
Nice job Americans. When will you people learn to treat your citizens with decency and stop this ridiculous behaviour. You should be protesting in your streets.
Suggestion: for international travel, when possible stow your powered off phone in checked baggage, and bring a non-important factory-reset phone or tablet for entertainment or to connect to the cloud if needed for work etc. If needed keep your work files in a hidden folder on an SD card in your camera... lots of annoying but increasingly necessary workarounds to deal with the growth of authoritarian states.
I thought this, too, but apparently a small device with an installed battery can be checked. Specifically, you can check a device with an installed battery of up to 100 watt hours. If the battery is loose, it has to be carried on. If is larger capacity, it might need special approval.
Only when they are outside a device. So checking in a laptop with a battery is fine, checking in only the battery is not.
However last time I checked (few years ago) there was also a wattage limitation to that, batteries below 99watt/hour could be checked in. A phone battery is about 10watt/hour, laptop 100-200wh.
When checking in baggage at the ticketing line, there is a list of things you cannot check, and they also read out a line when they are "courtesy checking" your carry on when the bins are full. This list include "smart" luggage with li-po batteries, they cannot be checked without removing the battery. They include e-cigarettes, and all sorts of other much less than 98Wh batteries. The manufacturers of batteries for professional cameras make 98Wh batteries specifically so they can be brought onto a plane. These are meant to be carried on and are not allowed to be checked. I used to shoot a lot of VR using GoPros. The pelican case had four 6-camera rigs with a spare body per rig totaling 28 cameras with li-po batteries. We were not allowed to check them as instructed by the ticketing agent.
Instead of a factory-reset decoy phone or tablet, bring a lightly used decoy with enough fakeish stuff on it that it looks legit on casual inspection. Keep your real phone powered off, deeper in your luggage. No need to go though all that nonsense with hidden SD cards.
Be compliant with the border control people and offer up your decoy without complaint. You win if they don't search your stuff at all, and you win if they're satisfied with your faux compliance with the decoy. You only need to start to resist and demand your rights once they've shown an unusual interest in you and thoroughly search your stuff, but if they're doing that they probably had it in for you anyway.
It seems like the risk that they would discover both phones is not worth the reward of hiding the content on your everyday phone. I agree in principal that you shouldn’t be compelled to unlock your phone at the border, especially on the way out, and I hope that we can change our laws to fix that. But as a traveler who just wants to get on my plane, I’m gonna swallow my pride and let them dig through my chat history or whatever, rather than risk them finding that I have a decoy phone, which basically guarantees I’m spending the night in some extralegal black site.
All the inbound customs checkpoints I've seen in the US and overseas are after you pick up your checked luggage. It sounds like this specific case was outbound, but outbound inspection at commercial airports is unusual in the US.
yep, i've been pulled aside on the jetway while boarding a british airways flight to the usa, to have my carry-on searched. this was in heathrow, so not sure who the particular security agent worked for. none of my phones or electronics were turned on or checked, though...
I would prefer a phone where I can have more than one partition. For all intents and purposes the presentation looks the same but unless I am in the more secure partition I may not see everything that is on my phone.
This would need some work on the app side, like being able to push anything I want from nonsecure to secure partition with a swipe or similar gesture. once pushed to another partition the only way to return it to the open partition would be swap to secure and copy it back.
you want a bell-lapadula [0] style security labeling model on the phone, i think. it would only allow allow write-up (copy data from insecure to secure side) and read-down (view data on insecure side from secure) mechanisms.
Here's are the procedings [1] and the complaint [2]
Say what you will about the US and the fact that you can get shot for looking at the wrong guy at the wrong time, but the mere fact that this happening and so easy to follow is quite interesting. In Germany you'd be laughed out of the room and I've had my fair share of racism to deal with from the authorities despite having grown up here.
Sorry who would be laughed out of the room and for what? It wasnt clear to me from what you wrote
Also I found it interesting that Germans perceive the US as overly litigious but I found an article that said Germany has more lawsuits (per capita? In absolute totals?), funny how perception takes a long time to catch up to various forms of reality
German law allows predatory lawyers to file lawsuits on behalf of another party without their involvement. That level of BS thankfully doesn't happen in the US.
Abmahnung is not a proper lawsuit, it's a mostly legal way to get parties to agree in case of a legal dispute without having to actually involve a court. You can ask to be reimbursed for incurred costs for up to 1000€. The current government is working no reducing the abuse of this legal mechanism.
Sending one of these requires you also to clearly show how the recipient infringed on your rights or a law that affects you or your business in a negative way and lay out the costs you want reimbursed for sending the letter (up to 1000€). If you're wrong about it you'll have to pay all and any attorney fees of the other party.
If someone refuses to pay or sign the Abmahnung you have to go to court, in which case you'll need agreement from the party you're representing.
To file an actual lawsuit you still need to be wronged or damaged by the actions of another party, you can't just sue in the name of someone else without them agreeing to it. This is also limited to civil law, criminal law is handled by the state prosecutor via the police, not you yourself.
I take semantical distinctions that are very important because those are important in the law because law isn't made by people that don't care about it for 300$.
- If you are found wrong, you have to pay the defending party legal costs;
- If the defending party ever decides to fight and you don't have the approval of the wronged party, you can't even defend yourself (read the point above again);
- It's only for small values, and there is no upwards negotiation (you must lay the costs down at the letter).
That's the government not requiring a judicial process for small values, while keeping all the rights of the defending party (I wish my country had something like that). You may not care about the difference, but that only speaks about you, because there's a huge difference there.
The problem with Customs and Border Protection is the attitude. They do have a challenging job. 99%+ of travelers are legit and doing nothing nefarious. They have to pick out the ones who are not legit/up to no good. I have no problem with them asking questions of myself or other travelers, even a lot of questions.
The problem is the attitude and abusive nature of their conduct. I have had this experience a couple times and one time with my mother and I am a citizen.
Plenty of other countries have customs/border agents that quiz you without attacking or belittling you.
Had a really similar experience until I said that “this is the cheapest rub job I’ve ever gotten” and winked at him. He didn’t appreciate that.
Tbh I seem to be making it my life’s work to be a little shit at airport security. I will _never_ use the millimetre scanner which seems to be a huge point of contentenion. And, while not TSA, the Gatwick airport security were trying very hard to convince me that I didn’t have a solid reason not to use this thing. Almost calling me silly or implying I’m stupid.
On the same trip I tried flying with half a tub of hair créme (layrite) and, while I managed to fly in from Copenhagen with the tub, apparently Gatwick has different rules, so if the container has the potential of fitting more than 100ml it’s disallowed.
Empty bottles are fine, but even a single drop of water makes it forbidden.
Wow. I thought the experience I had with Gatwick was a one-off... :(
These days I aim for London City or Leeds-Bradford if I can, Heathrow is my second choice, and I'll actively avoid Gatwick and Manchester unless there's no other alternative.
I keep meaning to try Glasgow or Edinburgh for departures... I've flown into Edinburgh due to a KLM screw-up but never departed from there.
Basically, constantly rushed by the security staff, and another passenger tried to make off with my phone (the guy next to me stopped him by asking "Hey, are you with this guy (me)? I think that's his...").
From my experience, flying out of Edinburgh the staff have all been pleasant enough, but depending on your luck the queues at the security bit can be a bit annoying.
Manchester is the one airport that I will flat out avoid. It's up their with some of the worst US airports, and unlike those airports, has alternatives in reasonable distances.
You can even see by the passive aggressive (and consistent device) signs in security "All electronic devices must be taken out. Small electronic devices are excluded. Failure may result in delays of up to 2 hours" that it's an institutional problem. iirc they had some distinction where being battery powered meant it was a small electronic device, unless it was an iPad.
Add to that usual airport inconsistencies like "do I need to remove an 8inch tablet?" from my bag. A 10 inch tablet is pretty universally required to be removed, but I've been instructed both to return my 8 inch tablet to my bag or to remove it from my bag and sneered at for getting it wrong, sometimes at the same airport.
Or let's talk shoes + TSA in the US: Some airports require them through the scanner, others will look at you like your crazy. This will often not be reflected in local signage.
But then threatening a 2 hour delay for not reading their mind is just dumb.
In my final visit to Manchester airport, apparently an 8inch tablet does count as a small electronic device but a PS4 controller does not. Therefore I was supposed to conclude from the passive aggressive sign that the tablet must be in my bag and the PS4 controller must not be in my bag.
I've never travelled through Manchester. But I travel a lot, and what I do is simply to grab a bunch of trays, and add all my gadgets (and camera, if I have one) from the bag and put them on a tray. Including the little Kindle.
There's no point wasting time asking. Sometimes (b/c this depends on the local rules of the country, and they change too) the security will notice and say 'no need, keep the camera in the bag', but if not, it does no harm.
I don't remove my shoes unless there's a sign saying that I must. As my shoes don't have any metal in them there's never a problem. But I always wear simple shoes that I can just flip off in a moment, without bending down, just in case.
What happens if you decline the millimetre scanner in a UK airport?
Gov't guidance states that ‘...the individual must either be screened by an alternative method which includes at least an enhanced hand search in private...’ [0]. Is that just a standard pat-down, or is it more ‘eeny meeny miney mo, I wonder where my glove will go?’
They make it look more intimidating than it is, it's a standard pat-down in a room, the most invasive thing they did was put a finger in my waistband and rub around it.
I don't know about the OP but I have hardware attached to my body that can't go through.
I also have clearly labeled liquids (for medical reasons) which by law I am allowed to carry. At SLC the TSA meticulously opened each one, ruining sterility so I had to discard the lot. Fortunately I got home safely.
Not OP but I don't trust their data security and privacy practices and don't like the fact that it's based on gendered patterns (I get my hair ruffled through because I put it up and I'm a man, I can't imagine the horror pre-op trans people go through).
I rejected the body scan and so they did a pat down. I definitely felt my nuts gettin touched a bit. So I ripped ass as loudly as I could once his head was around my waist.
The search went from touching every point for "weapons" to immediately letting me through. Didn't even finish the pat down. So if you want to get through quicker, eat some taco bell I guess.
Maybe they thought I shit myself, but whatever, some of those bastards are scum. Not all, but enough of them are.
My "best" experience was getting called for a questioning, having to wait 1 hour while missing my flight, while guys that were supposed to interrogate were having a "coffee" break in a booth few metres away.
When the guy turned up (R. Torres on the badge) he was visibly drunk.
I went through the TSA checkpoint at the United Premier Access this last Tuesday. They have the new automated bin return system. Some of the people who travel less frequently were leaving the bins behind instead of putting them in the machine to be returned to the front. The TSA agent shouted at them repeatedly, "do any of you read English? Can't you read the damn sign?" While he pointed at the instructions. He did this for the entire time I was near the checkpoint.
This is belittling. Not everyone flys frequently and knows this process. How about respecting them and teaching them the new way?
I wanted to say something to one of the other agents, but why risk ending up on a list especially when it's this hard to get through now.
I travel frequently and those machines at lax always throw me off. And they expect you to stand right up next to someone else while you empty your pockets. Literally feels like I’m cattle.
I think you overestimate the competence of TSA. Last I had read, TSA had never prevented a terrorist attack, and has an abysmal record in tests where people try to get things like guns and knives past them.
No, it's a liability transfer from the airline industry and a subsidy to various contractors. Sure, security theater is the cover for all that, but it's not just security theater.
Helsinki:
"why am i being checked?"
smiles looking stupid
"no really, why am i being checked"
"i don't know, i just work here"
"so you just follow orders blindly? can someone explain what's going on"
no one could explain anything because Helsinki airport is a piece of..., same as Gatwick or Luton.
regarding TSA, since I don't have facebook, snapchat, instagram it's always scary talking to them.
There could be a problem also with legit accounts with the same name as you or, even worse, fake accounts created with your name for some reason (from bots to exgirlfriend revenge to I'll reserve this name "just-in-case"). You don't know that those accounts exist, but they can take a quick look and think that you are a lier. They do not have the time or the desire to verify that. I remember a twitter "pvaldes" account created minutes after declinate to upload a photo of my face to a popular freelancer platform. The account showed a naked guy seen from behind showing his bottom in a pool, a location similar to mine, and not much more. Maybe is still opened, I really don't care.
So, probably a better answer would be "I had seen accounts in facefook/twitter/whatever with my name but aren't mine. As you can see, are mostly inactive or is clear that I'm not the same person shown in those party photos".
A solution is not forcing yourself to pass by this cattle-treatment if the country is so unfriendly to foreigners.
> Helsinki: "why am i being checked?" smiles looking stupid "no really, why am i being checked"[..]
In Helsinki, and in a lot of European countries, there's a little gadget in the security check which will randomly select someone for a manual search. It takes the security officer out of the equation.
If it's actually dice-roll random, I can see that working pretty well. It's actually fairly common to use "random coin-flip" type machines in retail -- you do random bag-checks of staff, and they push the button on the machine. Either "search" or "no search" lights up.
The probability is set according to the risk factor of the store, anywhere between "nobody gets searched, this is just to scare you" and "everyone gets searched, no buts".
In my experience, it usually gets set to about 15% probability. Just enough that a few people get searched every week, not enough that everyone has to stay behind for an hour waiting for bag searches.
In Norway we can click on smiley faces after security to say how the experience was, going from good to bad, there was an article in the news the other day about how they used the results from this survey for setting bonuses for the agents working in the different airports
I am American, living in Norway. I got searched while coming home from Amsterdam. Its OK, I understand, it is Amsterdam, after all, and they want to make sure I'm not smuggling stuff. And I pack very lightly, which doesn't help matters at all.
I've never been treated so well while being searched. The guy was kind and polite and smiled a little. I also learned that in his opinion, Americans were usually pretty easy to deal with, but more nervous in general. He thought it was because we (Americans) were used to a more authoritarian-acting police.
I used to get searched all the time in Seattle because I was coming in from Beijing and must have looked suspicious or something. Anyways, I was never treated poorly in the red line by immigrations and customs. Just one point of anecdata, Seattle is a sleepy place and the airline staff is usually a bit nicer.
I’ve never had to go through an extended customs search in another country, however.
Why not? If it is completely random, it is actually fair, and it'd filter out the people who seem suspicious but who are not. If there has to be a very good reason in order to search (probable cause) then people who understand the pattern can avoid it. If there is a completely random chance you get the special treatment, people will always have to be careful; not just when they're being suspicious.
Except you're between borders. You do have the very same rights airports as borders as well. Customs can check every person who decides to pass the border. That they don't is their choice; not yours. Don't like it? Don't leave your country.
I've gotten searched every single time I've went to Canada.
The last time they searched my car, stripped searched me, threw all my stuff on the ground, and after finding nothing told me to "pick up my garbage."
The bright side is, I was only held for 5 hours that time, but I did have a gun pointed at me. The first time was 9 hours, so maybe next time it will only be 3 hours.
Some people are just pathetic humans who get off on being above anyone else.
/I never had anything illegal any of those times and tried to be very respectful. I worked with law enforcement for many years, and know the type of people that they can deal with.
Also, everyone involved was white, so at least there wasn't racism...? I don't know, it's all dumb. None of my complaints went anywhere, and last time I called they said I "had nothing on file anywhere."
Going to Canada. I can't remember the exact locations, but the two that gave me the most headaches were the one in northern Minnesota and the one in Montana. The one in North Dakota did look through all my stuff, opened bags, but let me be on my way in an hour or so. That was my best experience so far.
Every time I went from Canada to America, they looked in my trunk, moved some stuff around back there, and said I could leave.
I still haven't been given any reasons why that happens to me, but my name must be somewhere important.
I just learned to get used to video chatting instead of seeing relatives up there. Much less of a headache.
I have seen those in multiple countries, and couldn't really say there is any correlation with friendliness.
But they do have managed to vastly improve my mood, via a different sort of mechanism: when I'm being treated rudely, I tend to linger at the machine, usually waiting for fellow passengers to clear security. During that minute or two (or five), I train my Nintendo skill on the :( face. My high score must be in the thousands.
They probably filter out such data. But maybe not–I kind of prefer not to know.
I get lots of cheeky smiles from other travellers noticing me, so the happiness even spreads. Only got yelled at by security once.
I always assumed it was for travelers to be able to give a quick feedback to get the frustration out of their system and be done with it. So was a bit surprised to see that they where using the data, of course when workers know how much money they get depends on them providing a good service, they will try to give a good service
I always find it funny when they place them outside of toilets. Like, who in their right mind would push them? Heck - some of them are even touch interfaces so you can't use your elbow.
Really? I've gone through a good number of British airports and I've seen similar scenes play out (typically not directed at me, though.)
British security/police seem to take their power a bit too far very often, in my experience. They have absolutely no problem with a little shouting. Of the first-world immigration officials I've had to interact with I'd rank them perhaps second worst, for general cluelessness and authoritarian behavior.
The typical British "don't say or do anything, just tut" behavior does apply often: Public displays of racism? Civil liberties being taken away? A simple tut will do. But if you're British immigration, then shouting incorrect or confusing instructions is just part of the job.
The number of times I've seen this is too high, and that's not even including the number of patronizing and wrong instructions I've gotten, either. For example, getting shouted at that I should have presented my American passport when I presented my Dutch passport (...what?)
"British security/police seem to take their power a bit too far very often"...
And that is the actual problem here as well. At the airport you end up in a "your rights end here" zone. According to the original story, the questioned person had no right to a laywer as he was not arrested. But he was also not free to go. So there you are: stuck between a rock and a hard place... Sure, you have every right not to unlock your phone. But you will go nowhere, miss your flight, your connecting flight, etc. And all the officers just go home when their shift is over and forget your case ever happened...
Can confirm! London City, as I said, is a hair nicer but that's primarily because it's a business airport which generally caters for a small number of flights (compared to Heathrow or Gatwick).
Heathrow terminal 4 staff is one of the rudest I have encountered. They have not been rude to me personally but every time I have been through that terminal I have seen staff being rude and racist to travellers. I have seen folks being physically pushed around to form queues, to make them hurry. This is not a one time experience. Dont recall if they were British Airways staff or airport staff.
I assume your quotes aren't verbatim, because those are some very un-British colloquialisms. Having said that, I know that TSA agents have worked at Heathrow and Gatwick before. Maybe he/she was one of those.
It's not a direct quote. One because I can't remember the exact words verbatim (this was last year) and two because the ones I could remember, I translated to American for the benefit of the HN audience :)
I think that the primary reason is psychology. People wanna feel safe. I was flying to Gatwick from Bilbao (EuroPython) and I walked into the plane like into a train. I was stunned. No one has checked my bag, no scanners. What is the point of all this fuss with security in UK if I could just pick another airport as a my entry point?
As someone who used to take about 50 flights per year for work, I’ve been abused by TSA officers of all races equally. Take your barely hidden racism somewhere else.
Harsh, but agreed. I have a relative who is older and retired. Got bored sitting around the house, so got a job with the TSA. He'd never held a job anything remotely to do with security, research, or investigation...
> TSA is a jobs program for people who aren’t willing to do real work.
The overt function, employing in many cases the exact same people, existed before it was federalized, so, no, that doesn't really explain what was new about TSA vs the status quo ante.
What you fail to internalize completely is that we are lucky they let us travel at all. That's where we are as "citizens" these days. We keep giving up rights and then you want to complain when things like this take place?
Isn’t the attitude intentionally intimidating, and a core part of the screening process? If someone is nervous and intimidated they may show cues that earn them additional screening.
> Plenty of other countries have customs/border agents that quiz you without attacking or belittling you.
I agree. I am Canadian, but I went to school in the US. After school I returned to Canada. A couple years later I had a US work visa to train Americans on a particular technology that my company specialized in, and I was maybe the foremost expert in (outside of the manufacturer). I wasn't taking anyone's job, I was literally helping Americans keep their jobs instead of being replaced by me or someone like me.
Anyway, on one particular trip I was called to secondary inspection and the CBP officer who received me there went on a long tirade about how I should work in my own country for a change. I mean, I did work in my country most of the time (I was still well within the 183 day/year tax treaty limit). He got so mad he actually walked away before he even asked me any questions. I was just standing there, confused, embarrassed and left feeling guilty even though I had done nothing illegal or immoral.
But, there are good people in the CBP too... one saw what happened and came over and profusely apologized. He asked a few questions, apologized again, and sent me on my way. On the flip side, I've had my computers and phones searched by Canadian Customs and they've done so with tact and compassion, which seems to be much more effective -- it's amazing how much more cooperative people are when you treat them with compassion.
But that's not just CBP, that's true for every industry that I've worked in... there are a few assholes everywhere and everyone else who is cool is a lot more effective because they approach people like they're working together rather than against each other.
I’ve been to Canada numerous times and the agents on your side are so nice. Also never really had a problem with us agents other than they all seem over worked and under paid. At least that’s what their attitude comes off like to me. I do remember one case where a Canadian agent asked what my profession was and at the time I said “web developer” but they heard weapon developer. Pretty funny and awkward.
And Gesh, I know of some people that cross the border a lot but don’t have nexus or global entry... it’s so worth getting.
It's a known traveler program you can pay to be a part of that includes fingerprinting, background checks, etc.
After passing verification, they give you a card, and reentry to the country is much easier (go to a kiosk, get a receipt, show it to a border guard, get through in <5 minutes).
Basically services where you can pay a few hundred dollars a year and get "pre-screened" so you have to do less when entering another country. You also get to go to the nexus/global entry only line so your time spent in line is often shorter as well.
I was texting with my phone while waiting next to a busy looking entry point at an airport in Canada; I was not going to the US, I was heading back to Europe.
An airport person asked me if I have a Nexus. Somewhat absentminded while texting, I said yes I do (my phone was from the Google Nexus line).
"Right this way Sir!", and I followed him for 10 meters.
And then at that gate entry eventually I pieced it together that my phone was not the Nexus they were looking for, excused myself and went away wondering why air travel seems to make me hypoxic.
On the flip side, I was traveling to/from Canada covering an IT director’s opening while we interviewed for a replacement. I was questioned at Canadian border and sent to the “penalty box” (secondary inspection) when asked why I was coming to Canada so much and responded that I was interviewing for a factory IT director position. I was interviewing as the hiring manager, but CBP was all fired up and yelled “Can’t your company find a Canadian to do that job?!” “Yeah [dumbass], that’s what I’m here trying to do.” Got over to secondary and they had a chuckle at the story and welcomed me into Canada.
The US doesn’t have a monopoly on thinking foreigners are coming for “our” jobs.
> But, there are good people in the CBP too... one saw what happened and came over and profusely apologized. He asked a few questions, apologized again, and sent me on my way. On the flip side, I've had my computers and phones searched by Canadian Customs and they've done so with tact and compassion, which seems to be much more effective -- it's amazing how much more cooperative people are when you treat them with compassion.
It doesn't even have to be compassion. Just get some people who either have compassion or can act as if they have compassion. Both work.
Judging by the stories I read here and elsewhere, the TSA seems to be some kind of organisation where losers end up, allowing them to vent their frustration about X or Y towards helpless, dependent people.
That's been my experience every single time I've went through the Canadian border too.
First time they held me for 9 hours before forcing us to go back. They rejected my friend because of an "expunged" disorderly he got when he was 13.
Ok fine, it's their country.
Next time I was held for 5 hours, strip searched, had my car searched (they did a garbage job of it), threw all my stuff on the ground even after knowing there's a $2000+ piece of hardware, then once they were done they told me to "pick up your garbage."
I've also had a gun pulled on me that time, but I could tell that the second CBP that was there saw no reason for any of searches, gun, or anything and he talked her down.
Still not sure why the hell she wouldn't tell me why she wanted to search everything. She said I couldn't leave until she was 100% certain. Certain of what? she wouldn't say.
The TSA's mission is to "protect the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce." Preventing someone's freedom of movement because they weren't permitted to browse his phone is entirely contrary to their stated mission.
I couldn't agree more. Just recently we visited Hawaii with our 6-month-old daughter. We were going through security and got pulled aside because one of the baby glass bottles was filled with water.
About 20 mins of bomb testing and pat downs later and making us and our daughter drink the explosive water... To be fair most of the people working that day were fine, it was just one complete moron calling the shots that made it 100 times more difficult than it needed to be.
> I have no problem with them asking questions of myself or other travelers, even a lot of questions.
According to your own rules you only really have to demonstrate citizenship. Whereas in this case that was already established and the person was still being harassed. I'm not a US citizen but did study in the US for a while. I've decided against going back to the US for almost a decade now because of this. Your own officers don't follow your own rules about your own citizens. I'm not chancing it as a foreigner.
These people are tasked with the impossible job of choosing who to harass or detain based not on real criminal activity, but on the basis of who they think might commit a crime at some point in the future. It is an insane task on its very face, and to top it off they are given wide discretion. It attracts a very special kind of cop.
This shit is totally illegal inside of the country. Some legal and mental gymnastics allow them to throw due process out of the window at the border. It’s inhuman.
CBP has sexually assaulted my travel companions simply for traveling with me; when I travel with people now we go through US customs separately to avoid any women in the party being finger-raped by America’s Finest. (I am singled out for harassment for consistently exercising my 5th amendment rights at all US border entries for 3-4 years in the early 2000s.)
So did anybody call a lawyer like he asked? Reminds me of the movie Trading Places where Eddie Murphy asked for a lawyer and all of the aristocrats coughed and turned away
My rehearsed line is “you in the <distinctive clothes> I’ll split the settlement with you if you record this and call a lawyer!”
Gotta disrupt the bystander syndrome by calling out a particular person
How would this even work? I google for local "immigration lawyers"(??) and tell the person who answers a man whose name I don't know yelled at me to call them, and that they get someone down to the airport? I'd like to think if I saw this happening I'd step in to help, but I don't feel like I would have enough compelling --- let alone actionable --- information for a lawyer to be interested enough to intervene.
In addition to calling several high profile agencies like ACLU and EFF, I would call one or two local lawyers and say,
"Hi, my name is FirstLast, at 2:05 PM I was at LAX Terminal 2. A man wearing XYZ was being led away by CBP agents and was pleading for someone to call a lawyer. Is this something you can handle? I imagine you can get in contact with LAX authorities if you are interested in taking this case."
I guess it's different at the federal level because they can detain people longer and with less cause, but eventually I believe they have to be offered the right to legal representation and being hauled in front of a judge publically.
Unless of course the US Govt wants to extradite you from LAX to Guantanamo, at which point a lawyer is the least of your worries.
Those "unlock your phone at the border" stories have become so famous that anybody who's "up to no good" would be traveling with a decoy phone at this point.
That's an absurd decision. The US has tens of millions of annual visitors, and given that the majority of the Earth isn't white, it's likely that a majority of the visitors aren't.
While the stories that hit the press are negative (and hence newsworthy), millions travel in and out without incident.
If you look at this statistically, you have a one in a million chance of having your phone searched at the border
The fact you have no human rights within the boder and must follow every orders from police without requiring the court order or face violence, detention without arrest, declined to contact the lawyer, or simply be shot are enough to avoid such place.
"Do as we say or you'll miss your flight" probably get 99.99% compliance. Most people have plans and "have nothing to hide," or so they think.
Question: Why do they ask all these question about kids, schools, wife etc? Identity is established, the passport is legit because they can check it, WTH do they want?
They ask those questions because they're questions that honest people should have no problem answering, but someone who is trying to hide something might make an unconscious facial expression or something. Basically they don't care about what your answer is, they are watching to see how you answer.
It's normal interrogation techniques. They ask normal stuff to see if you lie or you get nervous. Just watch any of those airport security shows on TV to see how many people who end up smuggling stuff fail to answer those simple questions or change their story several times during the interrogation process.
I understand that...that's why they ask 100 times the same question in detective interviews. Truth is the same, but if you're lying you might refine it and eventually forget so you invent a new one.
So it's not to prove that you're John Doe but to see if you have anything suspicious with you or if you're up to no good.
I was searched at the border a few months ago on my way in via car from Vancouver to Washington. It did unfortunately appear to be the case that they had selected a significantly larger number of non-caucasion looking people for searches that followed mine (I'm caucasion), thought I hadn't noticed until my girlfriend pointed it out to me. However, while I was waiting for them to finish searching my car, I spoke with a caucasion fellow who happened to be Canadian with a German passport. Based on what he described, they decided that he must have been trying to work in the states without the right visa. They then proceeded to molest him and his personal privacy for 4+ hours. He tossed me a pamphlet that they gave him indicating that they had the full legal right to do so and he was more or less screwed. I proceeded to start deleting every avenue they'd have to view chat messages, emails, photos, anything, but there really was only so much I could do. Fortunately, it seems like they just wanted to try and intimidate me. The search seemed to be a formality. From what I hear, similar things happen on the way into Canadians to Canadians. It's a strange world we live in, and I wish all the good fortune in the world to those who try and fight it.
The "unlock your phone" part is obviously a problem, and the focus of HN's attention.
What gets me is an Officer can say to your face "You are not under arrest" but then handcuff you, take you someplace against your will, and detain you there without access to a lawyer.
How can that possibly be the conduct of Officers in a free country?
I could even understand if the Officer just plainly said "we can not let you board this flight, you must leave the airport" or something similar. But handcuffs and detention even though you are not under arrest is insanity.
Speaking from experience, the courts are just fine with things like this.
Law enforcement don’t have to record their interactions with you, and it’s their word (a respected public official) against yours (a suspected criminal).
You may have heard of Mirandizing a suspect, but there’s an emerging phenomenon called Behelerizing. Tell the suspect they’re not under arrest (or claim you told them), even though you’re restraining them, and anything they say (or anything you claim they said) is ruled voluntary and admissible.
It’s called being detained. Means the officer has reason to suspect you of something but doesn’t have probable cause. You can see it on cop shows all the time when they arrive to a heated situation. Sometimes they handcuff everyone.
How long was this guy detained?
Props to him for filing a lawsuit I would’ve just caved to pressure and complained heavily.
This might be the "internet tough guy" in me, but if I was travelling alone I'd ask the officer if I was under arrest, and if they answer no, I'd ask if I would be under arrest if I walked away.
If the officer says yes, I'd get up and walk away (not towards a "secure area"), proceed to get arrested, and immediately ask for my lawyer, and would say no more.
This. Once you've already missed your flight they have a lot less leverage to get your to not stand up for your rights. At that point it's not like you have plans for the next 24hr (the flight was your plan and that ship sailed) so you might as well stand up for your rights, get "arrested", contact a lawyer and have a chance at getting a small "please go away" settlement in a couple years.
Please don't give tough-guy "smart" advice like this on the internet. You're going to end up getting someone as naive as you into trouble.
I can guarantee that most any officer will charge you with 'resisting' or 'non-compliance' or some other fuzzy, indefensible legal charge just because you pissed them off by 'challenging their authority'. And now you missed your flight and have legal problems for what, to prove a point?
Here's some advice on what pretty much any officer will think in these kinds of situations: 'Oh, you want to make my life harder? I'll make YOUR life harder'. I know, it's bullshit, unprofessional childish behavior, but it's real. And believe me, he/she will win.
Be practical. Changing this stuff comes from legislation, not some brave grandstanding power-move that literally not even the rest of your fellow travelers will give a damn about.
The legislation already exists. The laws that the government agency is usually in violation of in these sorts of situations became effective on June 21 1788.
The actual changes come from some judge who's had a bad day telling the prosecution "no, screw you, the officer's actions were in violation of the defendant's Nth amendment rights, you have no case when you act like this" and then that percolating up through the various appellate courts.
Geez. This is terrible. This just makes me consider using a burner phone and imaging my own laptop before visiting the States after being in China for four years.
The border doctrine so clearly violates the Constitution, it’s absurd that we allow it to continue (especially when it’s applied to most of he population of the US due to the coasts). It has to go.
The fact that border agents can search your personal effects is totalitarian, not unlike the stasi and other authoritarian regimes. The fact that this is 'normalized' in a democracy is astonishing.
This case also highlights the massive gap between civilized rule of law and what actually happens in these interactions, the dehumanization and arbitrary intimidation is not compatible with a democratic civilized society, and this culture of enforcement and lack of accountability is akin to a police state.
Not akin, the US is a police state. If you have ever been in a real police-state (Brazil, Israel, Cuba) you will immediately spot the similarities. And the US is not alone, just the most advanced state of a former democracy...
What's the protocol if the phone (or other electronic device) was provided to you by your employer? Wouldn't unlocking and handing over a "protected" device be against most company handbooks?
To me this kind of story should be on the front page of the NYT, not the fact that Netflix found out what my Candy Crush score was via my FB messages.
Being physically detained by law enforcement and having your Constitutional rights denied seems way worse than FB data leaks, at least to me.
And maybe I'm wrong but I can't help but wonder if race is a factor, that this and other stories like it would be bigger news if white U.S. citizens were the ones being subjected to this treatment.
247 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 61.6 ms ] threadIt may sound as if I'm asking out of doubt, but rather, I'm asking to see if my hunch that CBP is equally as reckless and uncaring in front of a camera as e.g. other law enforcement agencies.
So, the selfish question then is: How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches? Is there a way I can present my phone such that it drops into a mode that contains no data? Do I need to back my phone up before traveling, wipe it for the border crossing, and then restore once I feel safe?
It feels crazy to ask this question, as an American citizen, but HN, what do you do to protect your data at the American border?
[0]: https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
How does that impact that map ?
Save your encrypted system configuration/data on a service. Leave all your devices behind. Buy new devices on the other side of the border, and restore from the encrypted backup. This is really the only way to completely sidestep the risk.
This isn’t a technical problem, it’s a political one, which means it demands a political solution.
> How do I protect myself from such unwarranted searches
knows plenty of technical solutions.
The question which needs to be answered in political terms is about the conditions under which it is lawful to put pressure on individuals to warrant such a search.
Didn't half speed up border crossings when your itinerary is a week and all you have are your clothes, your passport, some travel money and your tickets.
Or you just have none, and they detain you indefinitely because you can't prove otherwise… though if you fear that, you probably shouldn't cross the border ever again.
I was wondering what they'd do if they ask for my Facebook account credentials, and I explain to them I have no Facebook account. Will I be detained for lying to an officer of the law? I don't have a Facebook account, but they might not believe me.
Is there legal precedence for this though? I thought the law (and precedence) was that they can only search what you are carrying with you at the point of entry?
For laptops, you can install multiple operating systems and simply set the BIOS or EFI bootloader to boot the dummy one by default when going to the airport and make sure the dummy hides the partitions of the real one. Once again, this will fool manual inspection, but not computerized. Fooling computerized inspection would require placing the real encrypted file system within the dummy one, without any headers indicating that it's a file system: much more complicated and can lead to data loss if the dummy system writes over it.
Either way, you don't want to simply wipe everything and restore once you're across borders if you actually want to cross. For one, there's the chance they'll just confiscate your device, but if you're not a citizen of the country you're entering, they'll just deny you entry on suspicion. You want something that's fake, but convincing, which takes effort.
That's what I plan to do.
"Everyone has a Facebook sir, even my grandma and my boss. And I'm pressing buttons on your cellphone and it's asking me to set things up, so it's obvious you wiped it and have something to hide. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. Either you start being honest with me, or you're not catching that flight, or any flight. Ever."
And no, I don't have Facebook, and I'm definitely not alone. It's not something that I would feel problematic to defend.
(Officer opens his laptop, searches your name on Facebook and finds someone with your name from the city you live in and your mug as their profile picture).
“Sir, you’re under arrest for the felony crime of lying to a Federal law enforcement agent. You have the right to remain silent...”
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-citizens-ice-20180...
They can also make up imaginary charges against you to have you jailed, as cops in the US love to do. Any time an innocent person is gunned down, there's inevitably a story about how they 'charged the officer' or had a weapon or whatever, and then when evidence appears to contradict that, the lie is quietly retracted.
You might say 'well, I have my ID while traveling, so it's fine', but ID is not always considered proof of citizenship. They could drag you aside at security (or elsewhere), decide they don't like the look of you, and decide that your ID isn't proof that you're a citizen. Spend a week or two in jail.
Somehow the only horror stories I read (or experience) is about US or five eyes (NZ being exception).
AFAIK companies are the exception, unsurprisingly. Some companies require laptop and phone wiping before travel, and if you can prove you are following company policy it might be OK.
Don't carry any passwords with you so you can not login any service or device even if you wanted to. Leave them at home. A good reason to wipe your stuff prior your journey would be to minimise trouble if your equipment got stolen or lost (a plausible threat when travelling).
I would tend to think there's nothing you can do to prevent them getting suspicious if they choose to do so. It's a bit unfair because it's a situation where you can't count on anything even if you have nothing to hide but that's, to my knowledge, just how it is.
If you happen to be non-white or non-christian or have such as family or who live in a majority Muslim country, then you probably do want to protect yourself against this eventuality. In that case, either bring a dumb/brick phone for them to search, or bring a smartphone which has data on it, but nothing you care about. Don't jump through a lot of hoops to try to fool them, because it'll look suspicious, and then you really aren't going to make your flight.
However, until that happens (which might be never), it's prudent to protect yourself, and telling people that they must take precautions for their own safety and well-being is not "blaming the victim".
I'm not saying you should live in fear, just that these kind of checks are not good for anyone. Not even if you carry your sweater over your shoulders.
I guess the real (rhetorical) question is, are you doing this for the principle of the thing or because you have something illegal? If the latter, then the only foolproof way is to travel without a phone, purchase a burner when you get wherever you're going, then destroy it when you leave - it's cheap enough these days to do so for every trip.
If the former, then (as much as I hate this) just accept that it's all theatre and nobody really cares what's on your phone, and just unlock it and let them nose through your happy snaps for a minute on the way through.
Just so you know, that's not how it has worked since 2013. Now they take your phone to the back room and image your phone. Then they upload that image to a service that searches your data. Then, and there is recent evidence of this, they don't always destroy the local copy of your data in the field office which would allow agents to browse your data at any time. Remember, they require you to unlock (decrypt) your phone before doing this.
In reality you can't without (potentially) causing yourself massive problems. Missing flights, detained for longer because you are hiding something because of wiped drives, encryption etc. etc. Oh, and they might add your name to lists that make your life miserable every-time you fly. So, unless a court rules in our favor, we're screwed.
Digital Privacy at the U.S. Border: Protecting the Data On Your Devices
https://www.eff.org/wp/digital-privacy-us-border-2017
EFF Border search pocket guide (printable PDF)
https://www.eff.org/document/eff-border-search-pocket-guide
Digital Privacy at the U.S. Border - EFF’s guide to your Constitutional rights at the border
https://www.eff.org/document/digital-privacy-us-border
It has all the information you need to deal with it.
Yes: don't have a phone. If they press you, it broke last night and you didn't have time to fix or replace it before traveling internationally.
edit: adding quotes to help signal the sarcasm
[0]: https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/...
[1]: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/as... (PDF)
However last time I checked (few years ago) there was also a wattage limitation to that, batteries below 99watt/hour could be checked in. A phone battery is about 10watt/hour, laptop 100-200wh.
What do all of these anecdotal stories mean?
Be compliant with the border control people and offer up your decoy without complaint. You win if they don't search your stuff at all, and you win if they're satisfied with your faux compliance with the decoy. You only need to start to resist and demand your rights once they've shown an unusual interest in you and thoroughly search your stuff, but if they're doing that they probably had it in for you anyway.
It also only covered the people standing in line... so I sat there, waited for my boarding group to go, and followed behind them.
This would need some work on the app side, like being able to push anything I want from nonsecure to secure partition with a swipe or similar gesture. once pushed to another partition the only way to return it to the open partition would be swap to secure and copy it back.
0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%E2%80%93LaPadula_model
Say what you will about the US and the fact that you can get shot for looking at the wrong guy at the wrong time, but the mere fact that this happening and so easy to follow is quite interesting. In Germany you'd be laughed out of the room and I've had my fair share of racism to deal with from the authorities despite having grown up here.
[1] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8168712/haisam-elsharka...
[2] https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.727665...
Also I found it interesting that Germans perceive the US as overly litigious but I found an article that said Germany has more lawsuits (per capita? In absolute totals?), funny how perception takes a long time to catch up to various forms of reality
https://www.clements.com/sites/default/files/resources/The-M...
was it this one?
https://ideas.repec.org/p/iuk/wpaper/2010-18.html
which curiously says that US has 5806 lawsuits per 100k people compared to 3681 in the UK (second highest) and immediately adds that it's not special
Sending one of these requires you also to clearly show how the recipient infringed on your rights or a law that affects you or your business in a negative way and lay out the costs you want reimbursed for sending the letter (up to 1000€). If you're wrong about it you'll have to pay all and any attorney fees of the other party.
If someone refuses to pay or sign the Abmahnung you have to go to court, in which case you'll need agreement from the party you're representing.
To file an actual lawsuit you still need to be wronged or damaged by the actions of another party, you can't just sue in the name of someone else without them agreeing to it. This is also limited to civil law, criminal law is handled by the state prosecutor via the police, not you yourself.
I’ll take “Semantical distinctions I dont have to care about” for $200, Alex
- If the defending party ever decides to fight and you don't have the approval of the wronged party, you can't even defend yourself (read the point above again);
- It's only for small values, and there is no upwards negotiation (you must lay the costs down at the letter).
That's the government not requiring a judicial process for small values, while keeping all the rights of the defending party (I wish my country had something like that). You may not care about the difference, but that only speaks about you, because there's a huge difference there.
The problem is the attitude and abusive nature of their conduct. I have had this experience a couple times and one time with my mother and I am a citizen. Plenty of other countries have customs/border agents that quiz you without attacking or belittling you.
About a year ago, I went through TSA and asked to opt out of the body scans in place of a pat down.
Another agent on the side watched the whole thing and made kissing faces my way the whole time while making gay jokes.
It was extremely belittling. Fuck TSA.
They need badge numbers and names prominently displayed on their uniforms, written in inch-high characters.
Had a really similar experience until I said that “this is the cheapest rub job I’ve ever gotten” and winked at him. He didn’t appreciate that.
Tbh I seem to be making it my life’s work to be a little shit at airport security. I will _never_ use the millimetre scanner which seems to be a huge point of contentenion. And, while not TSA, the Gatwick airport security were trying very hard to convince me that I didn’t have a solid reason not to use this thing. Almost calling me silly or implying I’m stupid.
On the same trip I tried flying with half a tub of hair créme (layrite) and, while I managed to fly in from Copenhagen with the tub, apparently Gatwick has different rules, so if the container has the potential of fitting more than 100ml it’s disallowed.
Empty bottles are fine, but even a single drop of water makes it forbidden.
It’s. Ludicrous.
These days I aim for London City or Leeds-Bradford if I can, Heathrow is my second choice, and I'll actively avoid Gatwick and Manchester unless there's no other alternative.
I keep meaning to try Glasgow or Edinburgh for departures... I've flown into Edinburgh due to a KLM screw-up but never departed from there.
I had no idea it was usually like this.
Basically, constantly rushed by the security staff, and another passenger tried to make off with my phone (the guy next to me stopped him by asking "Hey, are you with this guy (me)? I think that's his...").
You can even see by the passive aggressive (and consistent device) signs in security "All electronic devices must be taken out. Small electronic devices are excluded. Failure may result in delays of up to 2 hours" that it's an institutional problem. iirc they had some distinction where being battery powered meant it was a small electronic device, unless it was an iPad.
Add to that usual airport inconsistencies like "do I need to remove an 8inch tablet?" from my bag. A 10 inch tablet is pretty universally required to be removed, but I've been instructed both to return my 8 inch tablet to my bag or to remove it from my bag and sneered at for getting it wrong, sometimes at the same airport.
Or let's talk shoes + TSA in the US: Some airports require them through the scanner, others will look at you like your crazy. This will often not be reflected in local signage.
But then threatening a 2 hour delay for not reading their mind is just dumb.
In my final visit to Manchester airport, apparently an 8inch tablet does count as a small electronic device but a PS4 controller does not. Therefore I was supposed to conclude from the passive aggressive sign that the tablet must be in my bag and the PS4 controller must not be in my bag.
Gov't guidance states that ‘...the individual must either be screened by an alternative method which includes at least an enhanced hand search in private...’ [0]. Is that just a standard pat-down, or is it more ‘eeny meeny miney mo, I wonder where my glove will go?’
[0] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...
Same as a normal in-public patdown tbh.
Thanks for informing me, I will (with a heavy heart) strike Australia off my list of available working/visiting places.
The new laws surrounding encryption should have tipped me off.
Thanks for letting me know. :)
Genuinely curious, is there a reason for this, or are you just fucking with the security?
I also have clearly labeled liquids (for medical reasons) which by law I am allowed to carry. At SLC the TSA meticulously opened each one, ruining sterility so I had to discard the lot. Fortunately I got home safely.
The search went from touching every point for "weapons" to immediately letting me through. Didn't even finish the pat down. So if you want to get through quicker, eat some taco bell I guess.
Maybe they thought I shit myself, but whatever, some of those bastards are scum. Not all, but enough of them are.
When the guy turned up (R. Torres on the badge) he was visibly drunk.
I went through the TSA checkpoint at the United Premier Access this last Tuesday. They have the new automated bin return system. Some of the people who travel less frequently were leaving the bins behind instead of putting them in the machine to be returned to the front. The TSA agent shouted at them repeatedly, "do any of you read English? Can't you read the damn sign?" While he pointed at the instructions. He did this for the entire time I was near the checkpoint.
This is belittling. Not everyone flys frequently and knows this process. How about respecting them and teaching them the new way?
I wanted to say something to one of the other agents, but why risk ending up on a list especially when it's this hard to get through now.
That might actually be the intent - make people feel uncomfortable so they get more uncomfortable if they're up to no good.
"Hey idiot, get your goddamn bags off the (expletive) belt! Hurry the hell up!"
At which point another passenger decided to take advantage of the confusion and tried to steal my phone...
"God (expletive) damn you! Are you trying to make my (expletive) life hard?! Just take your bags and go, you're holding up my line!"
Approached the airport, "we do not comment on security matters".
"How can I take this complaint further?"
"You'll need to ask your solicitor to contact our legal department."
And then there was Stockholm Arlanda...
(On the way in) "Good morning Sir. Welcome to Stockholm."
And on the way out...
"Sir, is this your bag? Can you please turn the laptop on for me?"
'Do you need me to log in, it's for work...'
"Oh no, I just need to see it turn on."
Confirming the functionality of laptops (especially larger or older ones) is within the guidelines Just making sure it's not a bomb.
Easy to bypass though, just like all security theatre.
regarding TSA, since I don't have facebook, snapchat, instagram it's always scary talking to them.
why?
So, probably a better answer would be "I had seen accounts in facefook/twitter/whatever with my name but aren't mine. As you can see, are mostly inactive or is clear that I'm not the same person shown in those party photos".
A solution is not forcing yourself to pass by this cattle-treatment if the country is so unfriendly to foreigners.
In Helsinki, and in a lot of European countries, there's a little gadget in the security check which will randomly select someone for a manual search. It takes the security officer out of the equation.
The probability is set according to the risk factor of the store, anywhere between "nobody gets searched, this is just to scare you" and "everyone gets searched, no buts".
In my experience, it usually gets set to about 15% probability. Just enough that a few people get searched every week, not enough that everyone has to stay behind for an hour waiting for bag searches.
I've never been treated so well while being searched. The guy was kind and polite and smiled a little. I also learned that in his opinion, Americans were usually pretty easy to deal with, but more nervous in general. He thought it was because we (Americans) were used to a more authoritarian-acting police.
I’ve never had to go through an extended customs search in another country, however.
> and must have looked suspicious or something
Can it not be that you were coming from Beijing?
Fuck this authoritan border shit.
I know the courts don't recognize it; I will be dammed before I let laws determine justice.
The last time they searched my car, stripped searched me, threw all my stuff on the ground, and after finding nothing told me to "pick up my garbage."
The bright side is, I was only held for 5 hours that time, but I did have a gun pointed at me. The first time was 9 hours, so maybe next time it will only be 3 hours.
Some people are just pathetic humans who get off on being above anyone else.
/I never had anything illegal any of those times and tried to be very respectful. I worked with law enforcement for many years, and know the type of people that they can deal with.
Also, everyone involved was white, so at least there wasn't racism...? I don't know, it's all dumb. None of my complaints went anywhere, and last time I called they said I "had nothing on file anywhere."
I’ve never experienced that either way across the Vancouver area border crossings.
Every time I went from Canada to America, they looked in my trunk, moved some stuff around back there, and said I could leave.
I still haven't been given any reasons why that happens to me, but my name must be somewhere important.
I just learned to get used to video chatting instead of seeing relatives up there. Much less of a headache.
But they do have managed to vastly improve my mood, via a different sort of mechanism: when I'm being treated rudely, I tend to linger at the machine, usually waiting for fellow passengers to clear security. During that minute or two (or five), I train my Nintendo skill on the :( face. My high score must be in the thousands.
They probably filter out such data. But maybe not–I kind of prefer not to know.
I get lots of cheeky smiles from other travellers noticing me, so the happiness even spreads. Only got yelled at by security once.
>"Hey idiot, get your goddamn bags off the (expletive) belt! Hurry the hell up!"
>"God (expletive) damn you! Are you trying to make my (expletive) life hard?! Just take your bags and go, you're holding up my line!"
That all sounds so un-british I can't imagine this playing out. Which part of security were you in?
I've flown through heathrow, gatwick and other uk airports loads of times and never seen anything approaching that level of rudeness.
British security/police seem to take their power a bit too far very often, in my experience. They have absolutely no problem with a little shouting. Of the first-world immigration officials I've had to interact with I'd rank them perhaps second worst, for general cluelessness and authoritarian behavior.
The typical British "don't say or do anything, just tut" behavior does apply often: Public displays of racism? Civil liberties being taken away? A simple tut will do. But if you're British immigration, then shouting incorrect or confusing instructions is just part of the job.
The number of times I've seen this is too high, and that's not even including the number of patronizing and wrong instructions I've gotten, either. For example, getting shouted at that I should have presented my American passport when I presented my Dutch passport (...what?)
And that is the actual problem here as well. At the airport you end up in a "your rights end here" zone. According to the original story, the questioned person had no right to a laywer as he was not arrested. But he was also not free to go. So there you are: stuck between a rock and a hard place... Sure, you have every right not to unlock your phone. But you will go nowhere, miss your flight, your connecting flight, etc. And all the officers just go home when their shift is over and forget your case ever happened...
Consider in your calculations that a queue was being endangered by the behavior they were complaining about.
Heathrow terminal 4 staff is one of the rudest I have encountered. They have not been rude to me personally but every time I have been through that terminal I have seen staff being rude and racist to travellers. I have seen folks being physically pushed around to form queues, to make them hurry. This is not a one time experience. Dont recall if they were British Airways staff or airport staff.
The overt function, employing in many cases the exact same people, existed before it was federalized, so, no, that doesn't really explain what was new about TSA vs the status quo ante.
I agree. I am Canadian, but I went to school in the US. After school I returned to Canada. A couple years later I had a US work visa to train Americans on a particular technology that my company specialized in, and I was maybe the foremost expert in (outside of the manufacturer). I wasn't taking anyone's job, I was literally helping Americans keep their jobs instead of being replaced by me or someone like me.
Anyway, on one particular trip I was called to secondary inspection and the CBP officer who received me there went on a long tirade about how I should work in my own country for a change. I mean, I did work in my country most of the time (I was still well within the 183 day/year tax treaty limit). He got so mad he actually walked away before he even asked me any questions. I was just standing there, confused, embarrassed and left feeling guilty even though I had done nothing illegal or immoral.
But, there are good people in the CBP too... one saw what happened and came over and profusely apologized. He asked a few questions, apologized again, and sent me on my way. On the flip side, I've had my computers and phones searched by Canadian Customs and they've done so with tact and compassion, which seems to be much more effective -- it's amazing how much more cooperative people are when you treat them with compassion.
But that's not just CBP, that's true for every industry that I've worked in... there are a few assholes everywhere and everyone else who is cool is a lot more effective because they approach people like they're working together rather than against each other.
And Gesh, I know of some people that cross the border a lot but don’t have nexus or global entry... it’s so worth getting.
Agreed, I can't imagine not having it these days.
I am sorry, not a native speaker. What is "nexus or global entry"?
After passing verification, they give you a card, and reentry to the country is much easier (go to a kiosk, get a receipt, show it to a border guard, get through in <5 minutes).
Nexus is $50 for five years (and includes Global Entry and TSA pre-check.
Global Entry is $100 for five years (and includes TSA Pre-check)
TSA Pre-check alone is $85 for five years.
If you’re near a Canadian border, Nexus is the best financial deal. None of them are “few hundred dollars per year”.
Global Entry: https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs/global-...
An airport person asked me if I have a Nexus. Somewhat absentminded while texting, I said yes I do (my phone was from the Google Nexus line).
"Right this way Sir!", and I followed him for 10 meters.
And then at that gate entry eventually I pieced it together that my phone was not the Nexus they were looking for, excused myself and went away wondering why air travel seems to make me hypoxic.
The US doesn’t have a monopoly on thinking foreigners are coming for “our” jobs.
It doesn't even have to be compassion. Just get some people who either have compassion or can act as if they have compassion. Both work.
Judging by the stories I read here and elsewhere, the TSA seems to be some kind of organisation where losers end up, allowing them to vent their frustration about X or Y towards helpless, dependent people.
First time they held me for 9 hours before forcing us to go back. They rejected my friend because of an "expunged" disorderly he got when he was 13.
Ok fine, it's their country.
Next time I was held for 5 hours, strip searched, had my car searched (they did a garbage job of it), threw all my stuff on the ground even after knowing there's a $2000+ piece of hardware, then once they were done they told me to "pick up your garbage."
I've also had a gun pulled on me that time, but I could tell that the second CBP that was there saw no reason for any of searches, gun, or anything and he talked her down.
Still not sure why the hell she wouldn't tell me why she wanted to search everything. She said I couldn't leave until she was 100% certain. Certain of what? she wouldn't say.
About 20 mins of bomb testing and pat downs later and making us and our daughter drink the explosive water... To be fair most of the people working that day were fine, it was just one complete moron calling the shots that made it 100 times more difficult than it needed to be.
According to your own rules you only really have to demonstrate citizenship. Whereas in this case that was already established and the person was still being harassed. I'm not a US citizen but did study in the US for a while. I've decided against going back to the US for almost a decade now because of this. Your own officers don't follow your own rules about your own citizens. I'm not chancing it as a foreigner.
At most airports when they ask questions they don't care about the answer because they are trained to observe you while you answer.
This shit is totally illegal inside of the country. Some legal and mental gymnastics allow them to throw due process out of the window at the border. It’s inhuman.
CBP has sexually assaulted my travel companions simply for traveling with me; when I travel with people now we go through US customs separately to avoid any women in the party being finger-raped by America’s Finest. (I am singled out for harassment for consistently exercising my 5th amendment rights at all US border entries for 3-4 years in the early 2000s.)
Land of the free.
My rehearsed line is “you in the <distinctive clothes> I’ll split the settlement with you if you record this and call a lawyer!”
Gotta disrupt the bystander syndrome by calling out a particular person
And provide the financial incentive
Ive never made it to the nightly news with a video of me shouting that line
Or on a talk show about the lawsuit for that recorder to get their share of a settlement
So not sure why to tell you
In addition to calling several high profile agencies like ACLU and EFF, I would call one or two local lawyers and say,
"Hi, my name is FirstLast, at 2:05 PM I was at LAX Terminal 2. A man wearing XYZ was being led away by CBP agents and was pleading for someone to call a lawyer. Is this something you can handle? I imagine you can get in contact with LAX authorities if you are interested in taking this case."
I guess it's different at the federal level because they can detain people longer and with less cause, but eventually I believe they have to be offered the right to legal representation and being hauled in front of a judge publically.
Unless of course the US Govt wants to extradite you from LAX to Guantanamo, at which point a lawyer is the least of your worries.
While the stories that hit the press are negative (and hence newsworthy), millions travel in and out without incident.
If you look at this statistically, you have a one in a million chance of having your phone searched at the border
Question: Why do they ask all these question about kids, schools, wife etc? Identity is established, the passport is legit because they can check it, WTH do they want?
So it's not to prove that you're John Doe but to see if you have anything suspicious with you or if you're up to no good.
What gets me is an Officer can say to your face "You are not under arrest" but then handcuff you, take you someplace against your will, and detain you there without access to a lawyer.
How can that possibly be the conduct of Officers in a free country?
I could even understand if the Officer just plainly said "we can not let you board this flight, you must leave the airport" or something similar. But handcuffs and detention even though you are not under arrest is insanity.
No, it's kidnapping. Let the courts deal with it.
Law enforcement don’t have to record their interactions with you, and it’s their word (a respected public official) against yours (a suspected criminal).
You may have heard of Mirandizing a suspect, but there’s an emerging phenomenon called Behelerizing. Tell the suspect they’re not under arrest (or claim you told them), even though you’re restraining them, and anything they say (or anything you claim they said) is ruled voluntary and admissible.
3rd world ain’t got nothing on Uncle Sam.
How long was this guy detained?
Props to him for filing a lawsuit I would’ve just caved to pressure and complained heavily.
https://www.news.com.au/travel/world-travel/pacific/nz-to-fi...
Edit: changed words around to make it more clear.
I can guarantee that most any officer will charge you with 'resisting' or 'non-compliance' or some other fuzzy, indefensible legal charge just because you pissed them off by 'challenging their authority'. And now you missed your flight and have legal problems for what, to prove a point?
Here's some advice on what pretty much any officer will think in these kinds of situations: 'Oh, you want to make my life harder? I'll make YOUR life harder'. I know, it's bullshit, unprofessional childish behavior, but it's real. And believe me, he/she will win.
Be practical. Changing this stuff comes from legislation, not some brave grandstanding power-move that literally not even the rest of your fellow travelers will give a damn about.
The actual changes come from some judge who's had a bad day telling the prosecution "no, screw you, the officer's actions were in violation of the defendant's Nth amendment rights, you have no case when you act like this" and then that percolating up through the various appellate courts.
This case also highlights the massive gap between civilized rule of law and what actually happens in these interactions, the dehumanization and arbitrary intimidation is not compatible with a democratic civilized society, and this culture of enforcement and lack of accountability is akin to a police state.
Not akin, the US is a police state. If you have ever been in a real police-state (Brazil, Israel, Cuba) you will immediately spot the similarities. And the US is not alone, just the most advanced state of a former democracy...
This is more or less a form of intimidation at the border.
Being physically detained by law enforcement and having your Constitutional rights denied seems way worse than FB data leaks, at least to me.
And maybe I'm wrong but I can't help but wonder if race is a factor, that this and other stories like it would be bigger news if white U.S. citizens were the ones being subjected to this treatment.