542
U.S. Citizen Who Deleted Phone’s Data Says His Prosecution Puts Privacy at Risk (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 62 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Advice: if you know you don´t want your phone searched going through customs, don't bring it! Or wipe it before you go through. I'm 100% on this guy's side, but we're not exactly living in a free and open society.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 46 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    This isn't new. Journalists coming into the US in the aughts would be harassed by CBT and DHS, forced to open and unlock their laptops (and then delete whatever the officers found unsavory.

    So they'd come in with their computers fully encrypted and wouldn't have the pass key, themselves, so it was impossible to unlock them. If they were detained unreasonably, that became a new story the next morning.

    Once through customs, correspondents would call their office and get the key.

    But it sucks if you don't have a whole news agency to back your rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Interesting. Could they hold the device, though, until it's unlocked? I think this might be the Bad Press exception, not a legal right that would work for anyone else. Because if I gave the encryption key to a friend, they would just tell me to call the friend and get it.... and if they refused to give it to me, it would because I instructed them not to...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    No, they would just refuse you entry to the country.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Yes, if you're not a citizen they can do that. If you are a citizen, they can not deny you entry.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Seriously. Wipe it, claim it's new to you or whatever, put your stuff back on later if you need to. I'm sure you can find somewhere or someone you trust to get you that data back whenever you actually need it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    It brings up an interesting question: if wiping your phone after being requested access to it is illegal (?), would wiping your phone in anticipation of access being requested also illegal? Are we effectively required to give the federal government access to every private account in order to travel?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    My understanding is that if you knew a search was going to happen, it’s illegal. But good luck proving that you knew it would happen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 child)

    I think you might be thinking of spoilation--https://civilprocedure.uslegal.com/discovery/spoliation-of-evidence/ --which is destroying evidence you think might be subpoened. I don't think it would apply in this scenario.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Your linked source only applies to civil matters (think lawsuits for a slip and fall). It even says:

    Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37

    That basically arises out of the Fifth Amendment, which reads:

    No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

    In the criminal conrext, the Fourth Amendment rules, which reads:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    All that "probable cause", "stop and frisk", and "reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing" stuff arises from the "unreasonable searches and seizures" bit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

    Your linked source only applies to civil matters (think lawsuits for a slip and fall).

    Yes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    As long as you aren't doing it during an active investigation, no it wouldn't be illegal. That's the problem. Guy thought he was sneaky, and got busted. If you come in to investigate and suddenly you are deleting all the records, you are going to have a serious problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 2 days ago

    In the regular world, you can delete something to keep the cops from knowing about it as long as it's not covering up a crime. You won't find a charge of "destruction of evidence" without an investigation of an explicit crime with probable cause.

    If they had probable cause to search his phone, they would have used it when he was in Georgia, not waited for him at the airport where he had fewer rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent