Thoughts About Border Customs Proofing Phones When Traveling Internationally?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Mac 128, Feb 26, 2017.

  1. Mac 128 macrumors 601

    Mac 128

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #1
    I read this article, along with several others recently, and wondered if anyone had any advice thoughts on how best to deal with this on an iPhone?

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/business/border-enforcement-airport-phones.html

    It occurred to me that my employer forbids sharing my corporate account password with anyone, so I do plan to get guidance from my corporate IT department as it relates to professional data contained on my phone.
     
  2. laudern macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    #2
    If your employer is willing to reimburse you for your missed flight and any accommodation/other expenses because you refuse to unlock your phone due to your works policy, that's fair enough.....
     
  3. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #3
    I can't imagine this will hold up under scrutiny in the courts. Not without probable cause... Of course that doesn't help the average traveller held up by security.
     
  4. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #4
    for non americans US authoritites were allowed to copy information on laptops/ipods/phones when entering the US since a long time. The law also includes the ability to "forward information to US companies if in national interest".

    For me: perhaps no problem.
    For people working at EADS,BMW, Siemens etc. ? enormous problem. That's why usually they have clean devices just with an encrypted VPN connection back home.
    The US is currently by law officially allowed to do corporate/industrial espionage on it's airports to help US companies.

    If i had to fly to the US on a business trip i would ask beforehand what information i'm allowed to disclose.

    Also i don't understand why i have to name my personal social media accounts to US authorities. Are they too lazy to do the footwork themselves to simply google for my name and look for my linkedin account ?
     
  5. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #5
    I've been concerned about this too.

    One possible solution, at least for people using iOS devices, is to simply erase everything on the device before entering the US. Back up your data first, of course. And then do a full factory-reset, as if you were selling or giving it away, as you fight lands. Once one is safely inside the country itself, and presumably with access to decent wi-fi, simply do a full reinstall.

    I'm not sure that legally they can force you give a password for a device that doesn't contain any data on it.

    Congratulations Trump voters. We're rapidly turning into a dictatorship thanks to your selfish and cowardly choices at the polls.
     
  6. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #6
    It has been happening since 2001.
     
  7. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #7
    From the article:

    Uh-oh. Faced with the dilemma of extending his description of 'dictatorship' to the Obama Administration or withdrawing the stupid remark altogether, Drew ignores this post and doesn't reply.
     
  8. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #8
    Careful, someone will accuse you have being defensive.
    Source?
     
  9. JayMysterio macrumors 6502

    JayMysterio

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Rock Ridge
    #9
    Perhaps I can reply for him. While the policy began under Obama, it's increased five fold recently. In other words while it was a policy instituted by one President, it's becoming abused under another.
     
  10. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #10
    Source for both claims.
     
  11. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #11
    The policy began under Obama? That is incorrect.
     
  12. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    Ridiculous overreach. And only under Trump.
     
  13. webbuzz, Feb 27, 2017
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2017

    webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #13
    WHAT DOES THE BORDER PROTECTION SAY?

    Numbers provided by the Border Protection show a fivefold increase in electronic media searches in the 2016 fiscal year ending on Sept. 30 over the previous fiscal year.

    In 2016, under the Obama administration, there were 23,877 electronic media searches. That comes to .0061 percent of total arrivals into the U.S. In fiscal year 2015, there were 4,764 electronic media searches.

    A senior CBP official briefed reporters on the issue Friday, but the agency insisted the official not be identified.

    "We see it as an article that is brought into the U.S., no different than a booklet of materials, no different than a suitcase with items in it," the official said.

    "We've uncovered very serious and significant information in these types of searches, everything from national security concerns to child pornography to evidence of crimes to determinations of people's admissibility status under the immigration laws."


    But, but... Trump
     
  14. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    Please don't attack Trump voters. Both choices were awful.
    --- Post Merged, Feb 27, 2017 ---
    Thanks. Sounds concerning under Obama too.
     
  15. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #15
    It is concerning under any Administration.
     
  16. HEK, Feb 27, 2017
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2017

    HEK Suspended

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #16
    Consider also that if you do erase and they search the phone, you will really be on their radar when they see nothing. Border and Customs are the most suspicious organizations imagionable. I can easily see you will be on some sort of list, hence forth and forever.

    This whole terrorist thing has become the perfect path to tyranny. Well beyond any reasoned concern. Consider what would be done if 30,000 deaths or 50,000 deaths occurred annually. Oh wait, that's gun deaths and car accidents, those are ok. No need to spend trillions and get all bent out of shape over fearing those deaths. But let a dozen people get killed by a "terrorist" oh my god, the sky is falling.

    Complete and utter disregard regarding what actually has higher chance to adversly effect your life. Isn't propaganda grand.
     
  17. unlinked macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Ireland
    #17
    I think generally probable cause isn't required for searches at the border.
     
  18. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #18
    They need reasonable suspicion for electronics searches.
     
  19. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #19
    as far as i remember this was introduced during the Bush administration after 9/11. (2002-2004? ... i think i might have even read discussions about it here on PRSI)
    Which doesn't make it's use under the Obama any better.
     
  20. HEK Suspended

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #20
    Exactly, only slight suspicion. Meanwhile every year when they test trying to pass bombs through security, they fail to catch the test devices 95% of the time. Total lunacy and misdirection of resources. Meanwhile government poisens thousands by releasing lead into drinking water to save a few dollars. Priorities are totally messed up.
     
  21. unlinked macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Ireland
    #21
    Laws generally confuse me but I took from "As for defendant's argument that reasonable suspicion was needed, the 9th writes that neither was there a bodily search, nor was any property destroyed (two circumstances that the Supremes indicated required reasonable suspicion." that it wasn't required.

    http://circuit9.blogspot.ie/2011/03/u_30.htm
     
  22. webbuzz, Feb 27, 2017
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2017

    webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #22
    They do require reasonable suspicion.

    Edited because I might be referring to the wrong case
     
  23. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #23
    I just got back from South America(via Atlanta) yesterday and no one asked to see my phone or Computer. However if they had asked I would have simply refused(if they didn't have a warrant).
     
  24. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #24
    I used to be lucky on each return to the U.S. and get secondary inspection at MIA,ATL, LGA and cruise ports.

    They always listed streets where they thought I lived, none of them were even close. Then an agent in Atlanta rattled off several addresses in Atlanta (where I lived at the time) and he asked if I had any felonies. I searched for my last name through Federal, Fulton County and Georgia Courts and found the guy. Same first and last name. Stupid thing is that he was black and I am white.

    Never had any electronics searched.
     
  25. Mac 128 thread starter macrumors 601

    Mac 128

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #25
    There are other articles where blank phones have caused suspicion. Now I suppose you could claim it as a gift, but then you'd have to declare it everytime as well, and that would likely eventually raise suspicions as well, not to mention be potentially costly.

    They can't legally force you to do anything at all. However, they can refuse non-citizens admittance into the country, or detain citizens within the scope of their powers to do so.
     

Share This Page