Random Searches of Laptop Computer Information at International Borders

[GoldenFleece]

If you transport offshore banking information or other sensitive information on your laptop computer while crossing international borders, you should be aware that a UK statute allows random searches of laptops without any suspicion or cause. U.S. courts are now allowing the same type of random and intrusive searches.

Although the Supreme Court has not addressed the standard of suspicion necessary for a warrantless border search of electronic materials, the only jurisprudence thus far . . . suggests that customs officers may search any electronic materials (including laptops, CDs, MP3 players, cellular phones, and digital cameras) randomly, without any suspicion, and without any first amendment restrictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

A recent and controversial decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California held that the United States (U.S.) Customs Officials may seize and search travelers' laptops upon entering the U.S. even in the absence of search warrant or probable cause.

The traditional 4th Amendment protection offered by the U.S. Constitution does not apply to airport searches, held this Court. "The government may conduct routine searches of persons entering the United States without probable cause, reasonable suspicion, or a warrant," the court stated, citing the U.S. Supreme Court's 1985 ruling in United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531."

This decision was reached in U.S. v. Romm, No. 04-10648, a child *****graphy case. Romm, the defendant, upon entering the U.S. by the Seattle International Airport, after a trip abroad, was inspected by the U.S. Customs Officers. The Customs Officers seized and searched Romm's laptop, even though Romm had no been issued a search warrant or had any probable cause of been committing a crime.

After a careful search, the Customs Officers found that Romm had recently visited some child *****graphy websites and this evidence was used in Court in the State's case against him. Romm had ***8216;deleted' these websites from his browser but with technology aid, the Customs Officers could see the child *****graphy websites recorded in Romm's hard drive. Romm was on probation ordered by a Florida Court after charges of promoting children sexual performance and the California 9th Circuit Court said he had violated his probation terms by visiting these websites.

Some experts argue that this case represents judicial approval of a far-beyond invasion of privacy, even though its facts do not provide the best example of an innocent defendant. Commenting on Romm's case, Shaun Martin, a Law professor at the University of San Diego, said: "It is one thing to turn on your computer in the airport to make sure it is not a bomb. It is another thing for customs officials to turn on your computer and to read everything you ever wrote and to look at everything you ever downloaded."

This California Court decision has raised many questions about how corporate and confidential information stored in executives' laptops may be treated during these possible Customs Officers' searches and how long a person must wait until his/her laptop is searched if special technology needs to be used. Certainly, future cases will answer these questions.

http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_new...stnews&id=1584

[slogold]

this is why all data should be stored in cloud

[GoldenFleece]

Originally Posted by slogold

this is why all data should be stored in cloud

Can you recommend a few reliable offshore data storage companies whose servers are located in offshore jurisdictions that value privacy?

[P.G]

Originally Posted by slogold

this is why all data should be stored in cloud

He had no "data" on his laptop. It was his browsing history he had not cleaned.

There are simple ways to stay ahead on privacy, Cclean with a good algorythm each day.

Cclean triple wipe your free space at least weekly.

Don't use 'hush' or any so called secret mail, it will arouse a presumption of 'guilt'

Use regular non-suspicious mail systems but drop an encoded message into a "Hello, how are you" email, it just looks like garbage from a malfunction to any viewer without your personal key.

Use online storage, yes but encode with a 1024bit encryption.

You don't need to be a p*do to prefer privacy from ignorant government apes!

[TheOffshoreAdvisor]

I don't believe US customs would take an interest in offshore banking access information on your computer. It is really not the same as online kiddy p*rn which is taken very, very seriously in the US. Only terrorism and murder charges result in more lengthy prison terms. Most drug charges even have a lesser sentence.

Consider using PGP desktop for safeguarding your data. I delete all docs in the PGP schredder.

[GoldOffshore]

Wow. That's amazing. More and more encroachment on personal liberties. How hard would it be for them to simply change this to look for offshore account details as well?

[Barron]

Originally Posted by GoldOffshore

Wow. That's amazing. More and more encroachment on personal liberties. How hard would it be for them to simply change this to look for offshore account details as well?

Personally I don't think an equipment security search has anything to do with family photo's, personal letters, business plans, financial information, preferred reading material or anything else along those lines.

All which would be and are available to anyone today who decides to check a laptop or anything else at any border,

Regards

[GoldenFleece]

Originally Posted by TheOffshoreAdvisor

I don't believe US customs would take an interest in offshore banking access information on your computer.

The U.S. Customs directive specifically mentions that such searches are targeted at bulk cash smuggling, immigration admissibility, and "information about financial and commercial crime, such as those related to copyright, trademark and export control violations." That does not sound like a search only for serious violations of the law. Here is an official copy of the directive (probably not the most current one).

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/c...e_3340-049.pdf

On the other hand, these searches do not seem common. "Between Oct. 1, 2008, and Aug. 11, 2009, CBP encountered more than 221 million travelers at U.S. ports of entry. Approximately 1,000 laptop searches were performed in these instances—of those, just 46 were in-depth." Of course, this is what the U.S. government is saying. Is it the truth?

http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1251393255852.shtm

[GoldenFleece]

About two weeks ago [note: this occurred in 2009], Nate Cardozo, open government legal fellow at the EFF, asked U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB) through its online comment system, "If a CBP agent requests my password or encryption key and I refuse to provide it, will I be denied entry, will my laptop be seized, neither or both?"

The response, from a CPB employee identified as Frederick, was: "There is no concrete answer that can be given to your question since it is hypothetical. The outcomes you listed are possible, although a US citizen would not normally be denied entry. The actions that result from a denial to cooperate with a legal search are dependent on the applicable laws as well the discretion of the officers conducting the inspection."

In other words, a CBP officer could decide to detain a traveler who refused to provide the government with access to his or her device and data.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...rity/219500468

[GoldenFleece]

It's not just the U.S. border guards who want to search the files on your laptop and cellphone. The Canada Border Services Agency has been doing the same thing for years. From U.S. journalist Amy Goodman to a Canadian gay couple whose collection of porn got border agents all hot and bothered, the CBSA likes to look just as much as its counterpart in the U.S.

The biggest difference between U.S. border guards and the CBSA is that the CBSA hasn't made their policy for laptop searches public. Judging by how they've handled the BC Civil Liberties Association's Access to Information request, they'd like to keep it that way.

http://boingboing.net/2010/02/09/can...stoms-ref.html