On return to America
On return to America
Posted Jun 16, 2017 20:38 UTC (Fri) by gowen (guest, #23914)Parent article: Ryabitsev: Travel (Linux) laptop setup
Probably worth familiarising yourself with the procedure when you return to the USA. Long story short, they can take all your devices, copy them and will probably give them back inside a week. Be prepared to give up your encryption keys when asked, unless you're a big fan of spending long periods of time in interrogation rooms.
Try to avoid being suspiciously brown.
Posted Jun 16, 2017 22:42 UTC (Fri)
by walex (guest, #69836)
[Link] (5 responses)
* Most border posts are extraterritorial, like Guantanamo, that is not part of USA territory, and USA laws do not apply there.
Most times border officers won't press their advantage fully, but is they want to, there is little you can do. Most voters don't cross borders and think "better safe than sorry", "you can never be too safe", "safe at any cost to someone else", so them and politicians have effectively signed a blank cheque to security services, including police and border officers.
Posted Jun 17, 2017 5:27 UTC (Sat)
by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
[Link] (4 responses)
> * Most border posts are extraterritorial
However, simply being within a border control zone IS enough reason to be detained and to be subjected to a search.
> * If you are not an USA citizen you have no right of entry to the USA.
Business/visitor visa holders can be denied entry on a whim with no real recourse.
> * If you are an USA citizen you have a right of re-entry, as long as you have a document that proves that you are a citizen
> * There is a long list of things that cannot be imported into the USA, some of them surprising, and where it is a felony to attempt to import them.
> * It is very easy for people to "disappear" at border posts, USA citizens or not.
Posted Jun 20, 2017 9:32 UTC (Tue)
by MKesper (subscriber, #38539)
[Link]
Please remember that even pictures of your own naked children might be considered as such. Many people from other countries might not be aware of that. See for example https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/sid_0AE273DFF08CB718C74C2...
Posted Jun 20, 2017 15:44 UTC (Tue)
by walex (guest, #69836)
[Link]
So are foreign embassies and international organization headquarters, yet they are (to different degrees) extraterritorial too, by right of international treaty. Extraterritoriality as everybody knows is a legal concept, not geographical fact. Pointing out that most USA border crossings are usually contained geographically within USA borders is at best irrelevant.
> Airports are most definitely within the US and ALL of the US laws apply, including non-discrimination laws.
Airports, and their legal status, are not the same as the border posts within the airports, and their legal status.
>> * If you are an USA citizen you have a right of re-entry, as long as you have a document that proves that you are a citizen
That's completely ridiculous: someone who is detained "somewhere" as she claims that she is a USA citizen but has no documents to prove it, and indeed no entry documents at all, because she has "lost" her passport, brings suits in USA court to have the "top secret" camera records released to prove she had a passport, and thanks to those records, that are never "lost" either, she is released. Nice story! That might happen if her disappearance was indeed as mistake. If it was not, good luck.
>> * It is very easy for people to "disappear" at border posts, USA citizens or not.
With that right and two dollars you can buy a large latte in some places. Pointing out at theoretical rights without recognizing the chances of having them enforced is at best irrelevant.
The point is that while you can be arrested within the USA on a pretext (or on planted evidence) and then "disappear" into a malignant and opaque legal and jail system, or simply to be abducted and end up in a nice cell in the underground "detention facilities", there are still some minimal practical remedies that make that far easier to fix than"disappearing" at a border crossing. The practical status of nearly everybody at a border crossing is much the same as that of a dark skinned citizen in a police station in Tennessee in 1927, with all the 14th amendment rights that dark skinned citizen had. At a border crossing everything is stacked in favour of the authorities, whatever is or is not on your laptop or cellphone.
Posted Jun 22, 2017 18:44 UTC (Thu)
by jkingweb (subscriber, #113039)
[Link] (1 responses)
It's certainly true when preclearance happens like here in Canada: you'll go through customs outside US jurisdiction, and local territorial law applies. In the case of Canada the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and human rights legislation (which would probably apply rather than the Charter in this case) grant you significant protections while present in the country whether or not you are a citizen; for other places that have preclearance (like the UAE), you may have no particular legal protections.
Posted Jun 22, 2017 18:53 UTC (Thu)
by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
[Link]
Posted Jun 17, 2017 1:41 UTC (Sat)
by linuxrocks123 (subscriber, #34648)
[Link] (8 responses)
Regarding what the poster above me said, US laws do apply at the border, but, when you're going through Customs, you basically have a very, VERY limited expectation of privacy, so most searches aren't considered to violate the Fourth Amendment, even if they would be totally illegal anywhere else. That may be the root of his confusion. Fifth Amendment rights, however, do apply, as does the Constitution as a whole.
Also, I'm pretty sure we don't disappear people at the border or destroy their passports. We've agreed to inform foreign consulates when we detain one of their citizens, and we do. Our own citizens have the full complement of protections against arbitrary detention with regard to Customs as anywhere else.
Posted Jun 17, 2017 8:35 UTC (Sat)
by andrey.turkin (guest, #89915)
[Link] (7 responses)
Posted Jun 17, 2017 11:53 UTC (Sat)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link] (5 responses)
However, given that the only time the government tried this in the UK it led to a massive PR disaster, I suspect they'll be very careful about doing so again. (However, Theresa May is such a paranoid control freak that I could well be wrong.)
Posted Jun 17, 2017 18:47 UTC (Sat)
by andrey.turkin (guest, #89915)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Jun 19, 2017 15:32 UTC (Mon)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (3 responses)
The fact that you may not have (and have never had) the key is no defence.
So if I plant an encrypted file on your computer AND YOU CAN PROVE IT, you are still committing an offence for which you can be jailed ...
Cheers,
Posted Jun 19, 2017 15:54 UTC (Mon)
by farnz (subscriber, #17727)
[Link] (2 responses)
That's false - the offence in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act part III, which is the current law governing failure to decrypt, it is a statutory defence to demonstrate that you did not have the key at the point the decrypt order was given to you, and did not come into possession of it after the order was given to you. The exact wording is in section 53 of the Act: While the burden of proof is reversed (it's up to the recipient of the order to prove that they did not have the key), in the situation you describe, the fact that I can prove that you planted the encrypted file on my system, but not the key, is enough to act as a defence; of course, the likely outcome is a new decrypt order focused on you instead of me. I appreciate that, as someone not necessarily resident in the UK, you may be ignorant of our laws, but they are published in full on the National Archives Legislation site, and you can research them before repeating lies you've been told about them.
Posted Jun 19, 2017 22:47 UTC (Mon)
by anselm (subscriber, #2796)
[Link] (1 responses)
I don't think that's actually what this says. “A person shall be taken to have shown that he was not in possession of a key […] if the contrary is not proved beyond a reasonable doubt” means that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was in possession of a key, or it will be assumed by default that the person wasn't. Alternatively, the person can actively provide “sufficient evidence to raise an issue” with respect to the prosecution's claim that they have a key, which is basically reasonable doubt from the other end.
Proving a negative is always difficult, and here the “person” does not have to prove conclusively that they don't have a key; they just need to poke a sufficiently large hole into the claim that they do.
Posted Jun 20, 2017 0:16 UTC (Tue)
by karkhaz (subscriber, #99844)
[Link]
I don't think it's "alternatively". The sentence you're talking about contains an "and," not an "or":
For the purposes of this section a person shall be taken to have shown that he was not in possession of a key to protected information at a particular time if—
So indeed, your parent is right: the onus is on the defendant to produce sufficient evidence that they are not in possession of a key, and this is _in addition to_ their possession of a key not having been shown beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution.
Posted Jun 19, 2017 19:32 UTC (Mon)
by spaetz (guest, #32870)
[Link]
It can lead to prison time in the US too: https://www.engadget.com/2017/06/01/man-gets-180-days-in-...
Posted Jun 17, 2017 4:15 UTC (Sat)
by biergaizi (subscriber, #92498)
[Link]
Digital Privacy at the U.S Border: A New How-To Guide from EFF
On return to America
* If you are not an USA citizen you have no right of entry to the USA. It is entirely at the discretion of the borders officer, and they can detain you for any reason for any length of time.
* If you are an USA citizen you have a right of re-entry, as long as you have a document that proves that you are a citizen, but the border post is not part of USA territory, so that does not apply there. In any case if you hand over your passport to a border officer, she may "forget" that or "lose" it, and then you are no longer able to prove that you are a citizen.
* There is a long list of things that cannot be imported into the USA, some of them surprising, and where it is a felony to attempt to import them. It is very easy for border officers to plant such things on any device or baggage that you carry.
* It is very easy for people to "disappear" at border posts, USA citizens or not.
* In some difficult situations being a personal friend of a congressperson and having him come personally to "undisappear" you is the only way out.
On return to America
Not true. US borders start in the territorial waters or on the other side of a land border line. Airports are most definitely within the US and ALL of the US laws apply, including non-discrimination laws.
My lawyer's opinion is that if you are a permanent resident (a GC holder) then you are entitled to a deportation hearing before a judge (and with all the appeals afterwards), but border control officers are also free to keep you detained until the hearing.
You might be detained long enough to establish your identity but the right of entry is unconditional. And I don't think that "losing" a passport is going to happen, all the border crossings are recorded on multiple video cameras.
Simply having a "regular" forbidden item in your luggage will lead to a fine (or nothing at all), it's a misdemeanor. Felony will require obviously illegal items like drugs or child porn.
Detained people have an unconditional right to see legal council (or a consulate representative for foreigners) unless there's already an active deportation order in force.
On return to America
On return to America
> Not true. US borders start in the territorial waters or on the other side of a land border line.
> You might be detained long enough to establish your identity but the right of entry is unconditional.
> And I don't think that "losing" a passport is going to happen, all the border crossings are recorded on multiple video cameras.
> Detained people have an unconditional right to see legal council (or a consulate representative for foreigners)
On return to America
> Not true. US borders start in the territorial waters or on the other side of a land border line. Airports are most definitely within the US and ALL of the US laws apply, including non-discrimination laws.
On return to America
On return to America
On return to America
> you may be asked to decrypt your devices for a search. Failure to do so may result in unpleasantness
applies to USA and UK as well as China, with varied amount of unpleasantness. USA and China are kind of similar here: you might get detained for a while (or deported if you are not a citizen), and your device ceized for an extended period of time or forever. Failure to decrypt your device in UK may result in jail time.
On return to America
On return to America
On return to America
Wol
On return to America
For the purposes of this section a person shall be taken to have shown that he was not in possession of a key to protected information at a particular time if—
(a) sufficient evidence of that fact is adduced to raise an issue with respect to it; and
(b) the contrary is not proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
On return to America
While the burden of proof is reversed (it's up to the recipient of the order to prove that they did not have the key) […]
On return to America
(a)sufficient evidence of that fact is adduced to raise an issue with respect to it; and
(b)the contrary is not proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
On return to America
On return to America
https://www.eff.org/files/2017/03/10/digital-privacy-bord...