Republican privacy noose tightens: DHS can inspect laptops without cause

[xanadu]

You all might think I am crazy, but I personally am saddened by the loss of the freedoms I enjoyed before bush came to power. Anyways, probably best to clear the porn out before leaving the country. I also don't look forward to having my laptop fucked up by some douchebag at the ariport. Conservatives used to care about these things, but the benevolent mr. bush has richly earned their unwavering trust and support.

Travelers beware: U.S. agents now have the authority to seize and retain laptops indefinitely, according to a new policy detailed in documents issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. As part of border search policy, government agents are now authorized to seize electronic devices and inspect documents in them, the document states. The electronic devices might include laptops, cell phones, portable music players or storage devices such as portable hard drives.

The DHS document, issued July 16, appears to state publicly a policy that has already existed. Laptops and electronic devices have been subject to search in the past, and travelers have reported not getting their devices back. The policy has drawn strong criticism from lawmakers and nonprofit groups, who charged that the searches were invasive and a violation of an individual's privacy rights. Computers contain a vast amount of private information about family, finances and health, which could be easily copied and stored in government databases, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has complained.

The new DHS policies allow customs agents to analyze the contents of laptops without any suspicion of wrongdoing, U.S. Senator Russ Feingold said in a statement. The policy could blur the distinction between "search" and "seizure," which could also allow DHS officials to steal personal documents from laptops it has retained, Feingold wrote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...88.html?sub=AR

[Uncle Mxy]

I'd argue that tactics like this are bipartisan. The party in power always wants the right to dig into your computer shit regardless of your legal rights.

[xanadu]

If these efforts are so bipartisan, how come republicans garner support for these efforts by targeting democrats with scare campaign ads. Of course, democrats need to grow a pair and fight against this crap, but most democrats are pretty pathetic. The current level of govt. surveillance power is unprecedented.

[Fool]

Mxy isn't alarmed because he can already do this.

[Uncle Mxy]

The current level of govt. surveillance power is unprecedented.

That's only because the current level of surveillance power in the industry is unprecedented. Bipartisan efforts in the past have been equally invasive given the state of the art at the time. It was the Clinton/Gore-era that pushed the Clipper chip and CALEA on folks. Crypto isn't ubiqutous in the design of most of today's Internet due to Carter-era decisions prohibiting DES so the NSA could spy on your shit.

That's only the computer aspects of things. Surveillance gear has never been better, so it's easier to see and hear what you're doing at a legal distance. Most people don't design homes and wallets as Faraday cages, don't think about how their cell phone beacons their location, and are more than happy to give up privacy freely if asked (when the laws don't force you to give up your privacy to fucked-up insecure entities).

Today, there are commercial and free technologies that can encrypt sensitive information. Flash drives on keychains and don't get x-rayed the same way laptops do. Heck, in the age of the high-speed access, the Internet can be the hard drive for the sensitive information. I'm alarmed because real bad guys who really have something to hide will figure out this shit long before good guys will, so crap like this will be counterproductive to national security.

[geerussell]

I agree that it's bipartisan. I remember the first time that air travel profiling came to my attention in the news during the Clinton administration. Shortly after flight 800 they rammed through a whole raft of profiling measures as a knee-jerk reaction to something that turned out to be a mechanical failure... to make us, you know, safer.

Howeva, surveillance, profiling and data gathering on americans has been pushed farther, faster and with a tighter veil of secrecy under the current administration. It's not just that the tools and technology enable more of it, the Bush administration has also systematically undermine the safeguards. On a philosophical level they don't believe the public has any right to know what the government is doing. It's been a jihad against the FOIA from this white house and they classify with a zeal unmatched in recent memory.

[geerussell]

Heck, in the age of the high-speed access, the Internet can be the hard drive for the sensitive information.

Since any physical object on your person is subject to confiscation, this is the only true workaround. It's even a silver lining on the dark cloud of big brother at the border. Keeping your data online not only avoids customs but the risk of your laptop or other media being lost/stolen/destroyed.

[Zekyl]

But its also more easily stolen from the net. If someone knows you have what they're looking for, there are obviously ways of getting it if its out there.

[geerussell]

But its also more easily stolen from the net. If someone knows you have what they're looking for, there are obviously ways of getting it if its out there.

That depends. If customs jacks you at the border you're just out of luck. There's no amount of security or precautions that will help you and no one to appeal to if they decide to take your stuff.

How easily something is stolen from the net is a factor you can have some control over based on how much security you want to invest in and who's likely to target your data.

I'd rather have some say in the outcome than be subject to the whims of some jackhole in customs.

[xanadu]

So ensuring that sercurity agencies can monitor communications is the same as giving them free reign to do so? I don't like what Clinton did, but I would contend that Clinton's acts primarily maintained the status quo for telephone wiretaps, and attached the same to the internet. Meanwhile, Bush has asserted his right to monitor more or less whatever he wants to monitor. Also, the Clinton directives went through Congress, while Bush has tried to hide much of his activities. If Clinton was monitoring people without warrants, than he deserves as much ridicule as bush does.

I think the govt. should at least need probable cause before monitoring my communications or looking through my laptop at the airport. I am not sure why you don't see that allowing border agents to examine laptops, cell phones, cameras, etc. WITHOUT probable cause is a fundamental change in the law. It essentially assumes that anyone who leaves the country is guilty unless proven innocent. I have no problem with superficial searches for drugs/weapons, but I refuse to just accept that govt. should be allowed to search through all my intellectual property because it feels like it. If Obama is elected and this policy remains in place, I will concede it is bipartisan. Until then, I will maintain that Bush is just further pushing the envelop of executive power.