- TedZanzibar@feddit.ukEnglish3 months
Maybe somebody’s asked this already but how come, in this day and age, there isn’t a way to snapshot your entire phone into some sort of encrypted blob for storage in a location of your choice? You could wipe your phone and setup a throwaway profile with some basic apps before traveling, and then restore the snapshot once safely through customs.
Border issues aside, it would be very handy to be able to snapshot a phone like that anyway…
- SlicedPotato@feddit.dkEnglish3 months
What you’re talking about is basically an encrypted backup. Seedvault does exactly that, it’s included in many custom ROMs, including GrapheneOS.
- Limonene@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
Seedvault doesn’t backup apps whose developer chooses not to let you back them up. It doesn’t backup the encrypted keystore or the tee. It misses a lot, because Android fundamentally puts developers above users.
- angband@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
There isn’t such a feature on android because they can’t scan your stuff for advertising if it is an encrypted blob. Apple let’s you do this with an iphone, iirc.
- rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish3 months
Samsung has encrypted profiles, apps have no problem advertising to you from knox.
To do a complete phone backup like that all you need is Android root access. Root access on Android is, in fact, a little iffy. Any app given root access can basically read anything on the phone anywhere, keylog, remote execute, yada yada. The security landscape on android is a lot more flat than ios.
Some ISP Vendors do have apps that let you sync android phones and back them up, it’s just not common and they go through a LOT less work to make sure your restores will work later.
- jestho@lemmy.zipEnglish3 months
I believe the proper coordinate term is “gals”. Ie. “Only gals travel to fascist countries”. You’ll get a B-
- Treczoks@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
Prosecuted for what, exactly? If push comes to shove, it’s a fifth amendment issue.
- ContriteErudite@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I would wager that this is going to become a test case that is intended to appeal it’s way to the SCotUS. The SCotUS has already ruled that many constitutional protections are waived at the border, so it wouldn’t be surprising if that is the intended outcome.
Land of the Free™
3 monthsIdr if this was a feature that made it into a real OS or just a concept that never came to be, but…
I recall reading about a duress pin that instead of deleting stuff, just booted up normally… but to basically a separate user profile. From the non-duress profile you could choose features that would be shared between the two, like texts or call history of specific people, browser history, photo albums, etc.
So “sure officer, it’s 5224” would open up a phone profile that looks convincingly used, with nice long trails of cat memes and chatter with your gaming buddies about your favorite franchise enshittifying, and so on.
Punch in your real pin to unlock it though, and it’s got full access to everything, including data you want to keep private.
…and, uh, if any of you are designing a mobile OS right now, here’s your feature suggestion!
- rethnor@lemmy.zipEnglish3 months
Was there ever a revelation about truecrypt and why it suddenly shutdown?
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I didn’t know android could do that. I wanna turn one on! But, I can’t find it. I’ve looked under Security and Privacy. I have a pattern to get in (they can physically force you to unlock your phone with fingerprints), no facial recognition, and my security and privacy is all green checkmarks. I’ve tried to find it under my Samsung account’s security stuff. Its not there. It doesn’t even show up when I search for it on the settings search bar. What am I missing?
I use Android 16 and have OneUI 8.5.
- obvs@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
You may be able to install GrapheneOS on your phone.
I installed it on my Google Pixel, and I have no intention of going back to stock Android.
Yes, it’s a different Android based OS. It’s privacy focused, hence having this feature, and only supports Google Pixel devices.
Android is just a version of Linux, so anyone can make a fork of it. Most Android device manufacturers do this, including your device having Samsung’s rendition of Android and my OnePlus having OxygenOS (soon to be ColorOS), but anyone can do the same if they’d like. LineageOS is another super cool Android project.
- EonNShadow@pawb.socialEnglish3 months
GrapheneOS is a custom fork(? Correct me if I’m wrong) of Android that retains most of the features but has a private and de-googled experience.
i’m dumb but i installed it on my pixel last month and it took about an hour and they walk you through it on the website :)
i couldn’t get google messages working but in the end i realized i dont really care about google’s propriatary rcs implementation and just use fossify messages and signal/fluffychat for other chats.
- EonNShadow@pawb.socialEnglish3 months
Oh yeah I want to get something to replace my P7P at some point and put Graphene on it for sure.
Just waiting until I have some money because buying any hardware is just shitty atm
and also I want a steam frame
- 3 months
The charge treats the alleged wipe as destruction of property intended to prevent a government seizure.
He is being charged with destroying “evidence” but he was never charged with anything in the first place. That is like saying deleting any files at home is a crime. I’d think forcing you to present evidence necessary to charge you with something would fall under the constitutional right against self-incrimination.
- 3 months
Unfortunately according to the federal government you automatically consent to limited 4th amendment protections when you choose to fly. Domestic flights have more legal protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy.
They are allowed to ask for your phone’s password and do a “non-forensic” search of your phone for just about any reason. A more extensive “forensic” search where they plug your phone into another device can be made if they present reasonable suspicion. If you refuse a search they can hold onto your phone for several weeks.
The smarter move would have been to just refuse to give the password and trust that they wont want to go through the hassle of cracking your phone once it’s in custody.
Basically the only real way to protect yourself is to not keep any incriminating information on your phone. The courts have ruled that these searches only extend to data that can be physically accessed on your device and things like social media and cloud storage are not subject to the search. So it’s just best to save everything on the cloud and then restore it once you are done traveling.
- GreenKnight23@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
- get a phone with a removable battery and wireless charging
- break the USB port
- pull out the battery before crossing the border
sorry, my phone is dead and won’t hold a charge.
- nothing untrue about that statement
- state of the phone was a preexisting condition and cannot be used to apply obstruction charges
- IamtheMorgz@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I mean, sure, but then they seize the phone and still get all the data. In this case he wiped the data so it couldn’t be seized.
- skibidi@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
The data would still be encrypted. Sure, they could try to brute-force the key but it is very unlikely they try that on some rando’s phone.
- T156@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I’m half-expecting for it to turn out that he was being wholly compliant, and he’s being accused of destruction of evidence because they were looking for something that never existed to begin with.
- 3 months
From reading up on the laws and if what this article says is true, even if they unlocked his phone and found evidence of crimes on it, his case would be kicked to the curb as it was all an illegal search and correct procedures weren’t followed.
- 3 months
ngl, in his position I would have wiped it too. Not because I had anything illegal, but because I have a signal chat with the bros where we sometimes bitch about politics and I don’t need this administration’s FBI arresting me as a terrorist for stupid memes about socialism and queer jokes.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border guards do not need a search warrant to search you and your property at a crossing. The search was perfectly legal.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
“At a crossing” means with 100 miles of any border or port of entry. Which is about 67% of the country. It is complete bullshit of a policy.
- potpotato@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
67% of the population lives in that border area, not 67% of land area. But yeah, it’s silly.
- 3 months
I believe you’re right. My mistake. I misremembered that factoid.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
I’m not an expert, but I don’t believe that applies to airport points of entry. Regardless, if you’re going to something as suspicious as wiping your phone while at a point of entry, consulting a lawyer beforehand is just a reasonable thing to do.
You may think some laws are bullshit, (ie: sovereign citizens) but you are still governed by those laws.
All I am saying is be informed.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
The 100 miles extends inward from the exterior border, not around every airport. But every international airport is a port of entry over which they have jurisdiction and can perform warrantless searches. And, in my opinion, warrantless searches for everyone by virtue of simply entering into the country is a violation of the 4th amendment. Which is why it’s bullshit and shouldn’t be allowed. It can and often is abused, especially when tied to another equally (should be) unconstitutional “law”, civil forfeiture, even before the bullshit policies Trump and the SCOTUS have deemed reasonable suspicion for illegal status (i.e. appearing Hispanic, speaking Spanish, displaying a flag from another nation, etc.) I’m aware of the laws, but that doesn’t make them just or even constitutional.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
From reading up on the laws and if what this article says is true, even if they unlocked his phone and found evidence of crimes on it, his case would be kicked to the curb as it was all an illegal search and correct procedures weren’t followed.
- 3 months
ngl, in his position I would have wiped it too. Not because I had anything illegal, but because I have a signal chat with the bros where we sometimes bitch about politics and I don’t need this administration’s FBI arresting me as a terrorist for stupid memes about socialism and queer jokes.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border guards do not need a search warrant to search you and your property at a crossing. The search was perfectly legal.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
“At a crossing” means with 100 miles of any border or port of entry. Which is about 67% of the country. It is complete bullshit of a policy.
- potpotato@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
67% of the population lives in that border area, not 67% of land area. But yeah, it’s silly.
- 3 months
I believe you’re right. My mistake. I misremembered that factoid.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
I’m not an expert, but I don’t believe that applies to airport points of entry. Regardless, if you’re going to something as suspicious as wiping your phone while at a point of entry, consulting a lawyer beforehand is just a reasonable thing to do.
You may think some laws are bullshit, (ie: sovereign citizens) but you are still governed by those laws.
All I am saying is be informed.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
The 100 miles extends inward from the exterior border, not around every airport. But every international airport is a port of entry over which they have jurisdiction and can perform warrantless searches. And, in my opinion, warrantless searches for everyone by virtue of simply entering into the country is a violation of the 4th amendment. Which is why it’s bullshit and shouldn’t be allowed. It can and often is abused, especially when tied to another equally (should be) unconstitutional “law”, civil forfeiture, even before the bullshit policies Trump and the SCOTUS have deemed reasonable suspicion for illegal status (i.e. appearing Hispanic, speaking Spanish, displaying a flag from another nation, etc.) I’m aware of the laws, but that doesn’t make them just or even constitutional.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
From reading up on the laws and if what this article says is true, even if they unlocked his phone and found evidence of crimes on it, his case would be kicked to the curb as it was all an illegal search and correct procedures weren’t followed.
- 3 months
ngl, in his position I would have wiped it too. Not because I had anything illegal, but because I have a signal chat with the bros where we sometimes bitch about politics and I don’t need this administration’s FBI arresting me as a terrorist for stupid memes about socialism and queer jokes.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border guards do not need a search warrant to search you and your property at a crossing. The search was perfectly legal.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t search your property without a warrant, probable cause, or your permission.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
- An immigration officer also cannot search you or your belongings without either “probable cause” or your consent. If an agent asks you if they can search your belongings, you have the right to say no.
- 3 months
You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.
They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you’re a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- 3 months
We’re also talking about the 100 mile border zone though, not just airports. As you say, airports have different rules that allow searches.
- Sunflier@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
That Probable Cause standard requires a reasonable and articulable suspicion of wrong doing to exist too. Merely crossing a boarder alone doesn’t give rise to that.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
They can’t deny a US citizen entry to the US.
I doubt it would be grounds for turning away a legal visitor, though you would have to have a way to challenge it.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
You think they can deny a US citizen entry into the US?
- Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
I think what is legal and what this administration does (and gets away with) are two very different things.
- 3 months
“At a crossing” means with 100 miles of any border or port of entry. Which is about 67% of the country. It is complete bullshit of a policy.
- potpotato@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
67% of the population lives in that border area, not 67% of land area. But yeah, it’s silly.
- 3 months
I believe you’re right. My mistake. I misremembered that factoid.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
I’m not an expert, but I don’t believe that applies to airport points of entry. Regardless, if you’re going to something as suspicious as wiping your phone while at a point of entry, consulting a lawyer beforehand is just a reasonable thing to do.
You may think some laws are bullshit, (ie: sovereign citizens) but you are still governed by those laws.
All I am saying is be informed.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
Yeah it’s like having never had a single sip of alcohol but doing a u-turn and driving off when you see police doing mobile breathalysers. It looks suspicious as fuck, and the police will treat it as such until they’ve investigated and found you didn’t do anything wrong. You’re basically giving them “probably cause”.
- 3 months
You mean probable cause, not “probably cause”. And what you described, evading a sobriety checkpoint, gives them reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Reasonable suspicion amounts to articulable facts of observation that reasonably lead them to suspect you may be committing/have committed/were about to commit a crime (like apparently fleeing from a police breathalyzer check). It grants them the power to detain you for a reasonable time for the purposes of investigating to confirm or assuage their suspicion.
Probable cause requires actual evidence that a specific crime has been committed, that you committed it, and that evidence is secured. It is the standard needed to A) arrest you or issue a warrant for your arrest, and B) issue a search warrant for your property if evidence connects it to the crime in question in order to gather more evidence. (Note: They may do an inventory search of your person if arrested, and an inventory search of your vehicle if towed due to your arrest. This is limited in scope. A full search requires a warrant.)
Reasonable suspicion is a much lower standard than probable cause.
- 3 months
The 100 miles extends inward from the exterior border, not around every airport. But every international airport is a port of entry over which they have jurisdiction and can perform warrantless searches. And, in my opinion, warrantless searches for everyone by virtue of simply entering into the country is a violation of the 4th amendment. Which is why it’s bullshit and shouldn’t be allowed. It can and often is abused, especially when tied to another equally (should be) unconstitutional “law”, civil forfeiture, even before the bullshit policies Trump and the SCOTUS have deemed reasonable suspicion for illegal status (i.e. appearing Hispanic, speaking Spanish, displaying a flag from another nation, etc.) I’m aware of the laws, but that doesn’t make them just or even constitutional.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
They’re not allowed to do warrantless searches.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
To do a search they need probable cause, your permission, or a warrant.
- CanIFishHere@lemmy.caEnglish3 months
Border agents in an airport absolutely can do warrantless searches.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
We’re not just talking about airports though, but yes I agree on airports.
- 3 months
Under the border search exception, federal officers may generally conduct routine, warrantless searches of persons and items entering the United States without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity. However, stops and searches conducted in areas farther from the border may require at least heightened suspicion or probable cause of unlawful activity to withstand Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/
They can do warrantless searches. Just not within the entire 100 mile border. A fair distinction, but they definitely can at the border and ports of entry, and do so routinely.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- 3 months
Yeh that’s very different to saying they can in the whole 100mil area.
At an airport or actual border crossing yeah, I can understand that. They’d only be doing it when they have a big suspicion of something, at least you’d hope. According to them it’s like 0.01% of people a year.
- arc99@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
If the duress pin makes obvious it’s the duress pin then it’s not really doing its job. It should instead open a profile with not much in it while erasing the other profile and files in the background.
They asked to unlock his phone, he entered the wipe instead personal pin, and the wipe starts, with no possible reversal.
I mean yeah they discover it when he hands them the phone and it shows something other than an unlocked screen… But he is still in detention? Making a fake homescreen will fool them for like 30 secs tops until they open literally any app and sees it’s either completely empty or that it doesn’t work.
What would that solve? It just drags out the procedure
- arc99@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
The purpose of a duress code is plausible deniability.
There is an encryption product for Windows called VeraCrypt (aka TrueCrypt). You can create a hidden decoy volume inside an outer encrypted volume which has all your stuff in it. When mounted an observer cannot tell the difference between the hidden volume and the real volume since they are mounted the same way with different passcodes. You can put files in the decoy for plausibility but not the things you actually want to hide.
The same should be true of a duress code in a phone. It should be possible to put files, apps and stuff in the decoy that show activity e.g. email, pictures etc. Providing the other profile is wiped while this screen is showing then there is no immediate way of proving it was a duress code.
It would have to at least convince the border guard, but it should withstand forensic analysis too. So it might be necessary to do what VeraCrypt does.
- phutatorius@lemmy.zipEnglish3 months
On the Linux box I travel with, my main account is not shown on the list of user accounts when you login. There is a dummy account on the list. When I log into that, it has a full complement of apps and data, and the online email account it connects to is a secondary account I use for travel bookings, random notifications and other throwaway purposes. Financial data, important passwords, personal correspondence, etc, are not on that account. Just the usual stuff a non-computer-savvy guy my age would have: browsing, email and Facebook. If they ever comment on it being Linux, I’ll just say “my son set it up for me, I kept having problems with Windows.” But so far, the most they’ve ever done is ask me to show that the laptop can boot up. There’s also full-disk encryption so scans won’t tell them anything worth knowing.
The passwords I use are high-entropy. There’s no duress PIN, though I could set one up if so inclined. So far, I haven’t felt the need to.
Damn dog that’s a super smart setup, imma do the same thing to my travel laptop. Thanks for the suggestion ✊
"The duress PIN doesn’t give you a second chance and will trigger anywhere you enter it: on the lockscreen, while enabling Developer options, or even while unlocking an app that requests authentication. And unlike a regular factory reset, a duress PIN will erase all encryption keys and your phone’s eSIM partition as well. This makes it impossible for an attacker to access my data just by having physical possession of your device and knowledge of the PIN.
I think the real strength of GrapheneOS’ duress PIN lies in its subtlety. There are no confirmation prompts, no announcements, and no obvious signs that the wipe was intentional on your part. Of course, GrapheneOS is no longer a fringe operating system these days — it has even attracted the ire of law enforcement in some jurisdictions. In other words, a professional attacker might be aware of the existence of a duress PIN. But if you can enter it quickly enough, it achieves its intended effect: no data can be lifted from your phone."
Pretty plainly stated:
Main purpose - delete all data
A nice bonus - the process is semi hidden, no way to confirm mistakes or not
Purpose is NOT - Fool any attacker to think they have your phone even though it’s wiped
So it’s most definitely doing it’s job. You think that job is not enough, fair, but it’s living up to it’s own stated purposes.
Lol that’s just str8 false in this case, the stated purpose of the duress pin in the article is a system wipe, not plausible deniability.
So whoever has you under duress cannot steal your data
It’s not a ‘get out of duress free’-card
- Typotyper@sh.itjust.worksEnglish3 months
Empty apps or no apps aren’t necessarily a sign of guilt, but they will look at you like you are because its not normal.
Companies often have travel laptops which are a clean install and no private corporate info exposed.
- khepri@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
My understanding is you can’t actually be forced (legally) to give up your phone’s PIN or password as part of a police search, because it violates the 5th amendment against self-incrimination, even at the border. Now will they still find a way to fuck up your day if you refuse to unlock your phone, sure, but I feel like saying “I have a right under the 5th Amendment to not reveal my password” is going to be a lot easier to defend than “I intentionally wiped/locked/bricked my phone when you asked to look through it.”
- late_pessimistic@slrpnk.netEnglish3 months
According to the article, this guy’s legal team claims he did, in fact, tell them they should show a search warrant, and he won’t talk without a lawyer.
But they were ignoring those requests, and pressuring him further till he realized it’s a lost cause, and handed them over the Duress pin
- FauxLiving@lemmy.worldEnglish3 months
Depends
Most phones can be accessed by forensic software. The more secure phones are protected as long as they’ve just been restarted but before they’re unlocked for the first time.
Some phones, like an up-to-date GrapheneOS on a supported Pixel, may resist forensic imaging after first unlocking but the information is in memory so there could potentially be zero days or other exotic methods of obtaining the data.
A duress wipe lets you know 100% that the data is not accessible.
