This happened to me driving from the US into Canada with my significant other on a short vacation. After some routine questioning, the agent asked for our phones and passwords. Naturally, I hesitated and wanted to know why he needed to go through our phones. He didn't give a reason, but said if I refuse they'd hold us until their forensics team cracks the phone password anyway. I wanted to make a bigger deal about it but didn't want to ruin our vacation so I complied. They took the phones in the back for about 45 min, who knows what information they downloaded or uploaded during that time, then gave it back to me while interrogating me like I was a drug lord because there was a text message from a year earlier about a friend's girlfriend doing cocaine.
It was extremely unnerving, they went through all our private pictures, messages, dropbox files, email, notes, dating apps, etc. It ruined the vacation for me, and I've stopped visiting Canada because of how disgusted I felt afterwards. I know Canada is not the only country doing that, so from now on when I cross an international border I wipe my phone (after backing up) and just have a few pictures and messages on there. Incidentally though, that's the only time it's happened to me.
This is an important issue cryptographers and security minded people often overlook: the strongest cryptography is irrelevant if it opens you to such social harassment. What we need is practical cryptography.
I have found practical success by booting from an encrypted Linux partition that has absolutely nothing relevant on it, with a weak password I can always enter when requested by big guys with guns. Unbeknown to them on the same partition there sits another encrypted volume, at some offset from the outer's partition start. If I fail to enter the correct password for the outer partition, Ubuntu drops into the command line of the initrd, that is equiped with all the tools you need to mount the real, offset partition:
cryptsetup -o 100000000 create boot /dev/sdc3
So instead of having a nice GUI into which you directly enter the uber-secret password, you press enter a few times in the GUI, drop to command line, issue a single command and only then enter the uber-secret password. A mild nuisance in your bootup process, once you get the hang of it.
It's impossible for any court forensic team, let alone an airport goon, to prove there is actually another partition inside the outer encrypted partition, unless you mount common volumes and cross-contaminate. An important caveat is to properly defragment the outer partition and fiddle with the offset and the size of the inner partition to prevent any conflicts, then avoid writing in the outer partition.
It's troubling to watch one of the most amazing places on earth transform itself into a totalitarian purgatory.
Access to physical phone/laptop is only the first step -- mark my words. Big Brother's bureaucrats are never satiated. Next, we will have demands for passwords and unrestricted access to : email, facebook, photo sharing, hacker news posts, social media, etc.
I see sudden spike in the market for burner phones. ANd a long-term opportunity for a company that can create a "burner" social media profile.
Nitpick: in Catholic dogma purgatory is a place of purification, those in purgatory know that they are there for a reason and only for a certain time, afterwards they enter heaven. Hell on the other hand, is for eternity and ugly. That's why the two are easily distinguished in their iconography, both involve imagery of flames, but souls in purgatory look joyful and those in hell look despondent.
For others saying something to the effect of "we let them search our X already, so the phone is a logical step and not a big deal," you've already given up your expectation of privacy, so you can't understand why others would want to keep it. This is the slow creep of the state with concomitant erosion of liberty.
In a few short years, you are the ones who will be justifying any of the following on grounds that "they already do the less-invasive thing, why not one step more?"
- Mandatory fingerprinting (USA does this for foreigners in some airports)
- Declare all cash, declare all crypto (with addresses / xpubs)
> I see sudden spike in the market for burner phones. ANd a long-term opportunity for a company that can create a "burner" social media profile.
I am sure that some folks will try those things and it may work for a while, but the way things are going, it's not going to matter whether you bring your device, a burner, or nothing at all. All it will take is one more 911-like crisis and inevitable fear-mongering.
Then, your online profile is going to get mined along with everyone else's, continuously, by multiple state-level organizations who cooperate with each other-- whether you've booked travel or not.
By the time folks get to a border it will just matter of diverting anyone with a "red X" next to their name.
I was in Wellington during the GDPR protests. Instead of arrested and fining those who illegally searched and handed over Kim Dotcom's servers, they just changed the law to make it all retroactively legal; making spying legal on all citizens.
Lets not get too excited. There were about 40 million passengers transiting NZ airports last year, according to Wikipedia.[0] The article says roughly 540 devices were searched in the same time period. That's 0.00135% or basically a dozen people per million being searched.
That hardly seems like totalitarian overreach. In fact it seems quite restrained and pretty reasonable - and presumably must be intelligence led, since I rather doubt they are doing this at random...!
Factory reset and wipe your device before travel, and restore when you get to your hotel. I’m a privacy nut and while this is a disturbing trend there exist straightforward work arounds.
EDIT: I do this all the time and it’s not even remotely difficult or a big deal.
Twenty years ago, Nicholas Negroponte pointed out the irony that when he passed through Singapore customs, they searched his atoms but not his bits.
Is being searched before you get on a plane or enter a customs checkpoint some kind of hideous infringement of your civil liberties? No!
There’s no problem with this in principle. The problem is that it’s silly, and it causes a privacy and security violation while not accomplishing anything.
Riddle me this - what is the alternative? Don't look at a phone? Why do we look inside suitcases? Why have the concept of customs?
We search things across borders for things our country does not want. We don't want drugs. We don't want fresh fruit (which will trip up more people than drugs).
We don't want child porn. And if a phone is a container for that content, we want to be able to explore the container.
Of course, there's a million different ways around this. Get burner phones. Store content in the cloud. Have seven firewalls. Whatever. But that doesn't change the concept of inspecting things across a border to make sure things we don't want, don't come in.
And if that's a totalitarian purgatory, then name a country (or external border for the EU) that isn't a totalitarian purgatory.
> "A lot of the organised crime groups are becoming a lot more sophisticated in the ways they're trying to get things across the border.
Is this the new "think of the children"? The reasoning seems to be, criminals would rather carry their "digital crime-thingys" across the border saved on their phones, than upload it (encrypted) somewhere on the internet... Or is NZ planning to build a Firewall as well (better than China's)?
There’s a border patrol show on Netflix and they show a few phones being searched. It’s pretty clear it’s not about terrorists and bad people having bad files in the cloud. It’s about people coming on a tourists visa and working. They’d find all sorts of emails talking a out a job.
I don’t think that’s a valid excuse to search devices though. If anything I think it proves work visas need to be more accessible so people don’t have to lie their way in for a job.
>There’s a border patrol show on Netflix and they show a few phones being searched. It’s pretty clear it’s not about terrorists and bad people having bad files in the cloud. It’s about people coming on a tourists visa and working. They’d find all sorts of emails talking a out a job.
Yes, those are non-citizens requesting entry. This sounds like it applies to everyone - including NZ citizens.
And regardless, searches need to be proportional.
Full blown cavity/strip searches at random could cut down on the importation of illegal drugs, but civilized countries require a reasonable suspicion for invasive searches.
Freedom isn't free! Have to keep fighting for it. Or figure out / be lucky enough to become part of the ruling group.
Edit: I also find it funny when people get passionate about their "free" country's national anthems when they're one bad underpaid, undereducated border patrol agent away from not having any rights.
I really want phone makers to allow me to unlock into separate enclaves on my phone. I.e. If I use 1234 as my unlock pin, it goes to my normal phone. If I use 5678 instead, it unlocks to a separate user account with its own notifications, pictures, apps, etc., similar to a truecrypt hidden partition.
I have been thinking of going back to live in NZ to be a software engineer there, but now... uh, no. Such a shame, as it's a really nice country with very smart people.
Granted, it's been very "totalitarian" when it comes to immigration for a long time. Not that I don't think they have the right to do this, but when I went to live there with my kiwi girlfriend, I had to give them actual copies of letters she and I sent each other and get a chest X-ray to prove that I'm not just taking advantage of their socialized medicine. So this sort of scrutiny isn't totally out of character for NZ, but the digital search is where it gets intolerable.
If NZ wants to innovate on anything or to have more movies filmed there, they'll have to do it mostly by themselves, or pay ass-loads to import skilled workers.
EDIT: I made a correction to a part that probably gave people the wrong impression. This was not meant to claim wrong of NZ. I love NZ, and they have every right. I only take issue with the digital search.
As a New Zealander, I'd say we're unashamed in trying to balance the welfare of our citizens with growth opportunities from new immigrants.
If you're likely to be a drain on the public healthcare system, then you're not likely to get permission to live here. Why? It's not fair to those people who have already paid into the system, to subsidise someone who hasn't.
And we are picky. There's no visa lottery here. A points-based system with high thresholds. And that's OK. Same as Australia. Same as Canada.
I've thought about getting another visa too. I thought the x-ray and blood tests were pretty normal, until I talked to a friend with a German work visa, and she didn't have any type of medical exam to get her permit.
You've described pretty much every country's immigration requirements, not just NZ.
I've lived in NZ, the UK, and the US. Every one will ask for proof of health (TB, HIV, etc) and if you're attempting to gain a Visa attached to a GF then you have to prove it is bonafide, often with letters, shared bills/expenses, etc.
That's nothing to get upset about.
Granted, it's been very "totalitarian" when it comes to immigration for a long time.
> We have a huge housing shortage
> get a chest X-ray to prove that I'm not just taking advantage of their socialized medicine.
We have a problem with TB. We have issues with other disease coming in too and don’t seem to screen for them, which we should.
> If NZ wants to innovate on anything or to have more movies filmed there, they'll have to do it mostly by themselves, or pay ass-loads to import skilled workers.
We do pay assloads. For some reason we subsidise the films that come here while they exploit their workers and get exemption from NZ laws. Our homegrown hero Peter Jackson had a role in that.
Your level of skepticism about NZ clearly indicates you belong here. Come back!
I don't know how others feel, but if I kept control of the device I would feel much more comfortable with this process. The fact that they can make me unlock the device then take it out of my sight and do unknown things to it means I can no longer trust the device or any of its files (eg private keys, access tokens, etc that may be stored on it).
If they sit down with me and allow me to maintain control of the device while they ask to see recent chats and emails etc I would feel much more comfortable (though don't get me wrong, I still see the whole process as a huge overstep and invasion of privacy).
Oh yeah, being forced to knowingly show my privates to a stranger is slightly better than the stranger taking that look on their own without my knowledge and consent. Both are still bad.
But then it doesn't make any difference -- they'll tell you to do what they'll do anyway. And if you refuse -- the same punishment applies (fee, prison, etc...)
I recently had to go to America for a wedding, due to these types of policies I always go through my phone and clean almost everything out of there.
Photos, logout of Google, clean up downloads, etc.
I don't have anything to hide, however having some random customs dude go into Google Photos which has over a decade of my life documented doesn't seem exactly ideal.
"I have nothing to hide" is just another way of saying "My friends and family are stupid for trusting me." Your devices don't just contain information that's sensitive to you.
> We're not going into 'the cloud'. We'll examine your phone while it's on flight mode
This law isn't too bad as far as a compromise bill goes. The problem is a lack of accountability. Three fixes and I'd be okay with it:
1) Officials must document their reasons for finding a "reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing";
2) Travellers should be able to challenge the search in a court proceeding to occur no later than close of business the next day (traveller must surrender their phone to the court in the interim, but is free to leave the airport after that); and
3) Searchers cannot (a) copy data from the phone while searching, (b) turn off airplane mode or (c) take more than [2] hours to conduct their search.
It's a huge security concern. You should give your passwords to no one: zero/no people. I wouldn't do it just out of personal security. It's not a matter of just changing it either. Your can't put a device password in a password manager,, so that's going to usually be one of your highly secure passwords. It shouldn't be used many places, but you still need to change it everywhere afterwards.
Just from a basic security perspective, this is teaching citizens it's okay to give your password out to authorities, and that's just fucking terrible.
Not saying I agree with your "not too bad" assessment. But your list is incomplete without considering the violations of third parties who have shared items in confidence that are now on the local device.
So:
4) All third parties (meaning people other than the traveler) who have their privacy violated in the process must be informed immediately of the full details of the privacy violation. Which communications, pictures, etc. were viewed and or copied and by whom, and how to follow up on these violations.
Historically, I'm unaware of any country where you're entitled to require a court order before they can inspect your belongings when passing through a customs inspection at the border (and almost everywhere they don't need any suspicion of wrongdoing—they could, if they wanted, go through every paper everyone carried in, with the more or less sole limit of diplomatic bags).
A lot of people here are saying you should just put your data online and then download it later. But should you do this you probably will be using a third party as your host (most people don't host from home even if they should).
In the USA at least under third party doctorine that means none of that data is 'private' anymore and can be accessed without a warrant.
We immediately need a phone and laptop feature called "Border crossing mode". Once you can perhaps active anytime but only gets deactivated once you're physically in a predefined location.
> The new requirement for reasonable suspicion did not rein in the law at all, Mr Beagle said.
>
> "They don't have to tell you what the cause of that suspicion is, there's no way to challenge it."
This makes me particularly uncomfortable. There should be reasonable grounds.
> Border officials searched roughly 540 electronic devices at New Zealand airports in 2017.
That does seem low, out of what I assume is hundreds of thousands of travelers. With that said, it still doesn't sound reasonable.
> "It is a file-by-file [search] on your phone. We're not going into 'the cloud'. We'll examine your phone while it's on flight mode," Customs spokesperson Terry Brown said.
What files are they looking for on the device?
I mean, it's not like a terrorist will have a plan_to_place_bomb.doc file on their device, so what's the point? What file could there possibly be on any device that will threaten the security? And how is scanning devices going to prevent you from downloading that file after you go through customs?
As others have noted this is easy enough to thwart if you prepare, it will only catch the unsophisticated. So they aren't going to catch terrorists with this, but it probably will catch a few people intending to work while on a holiday visa.
But it would be nice if the phone manufacturers made it easier to side step.
Android is close already: it has multiple users. If it allowed you to hide a user (so you had to type in a name, for example), it would be mostly there.
One thing I really wish they would provide is a decent backup service, ie something that allowed you to backup everything on the phone, to an encrypted binary blob. Mainly I want this because having a backup that allows me to restore my data if the phone gets destroyed would help sleep easier at night, but of course it also solves this problem too: backup the phone to a hidden cloud account, factory reset it, restore it on arrival.
This sounds troubling and it's a little disappointing to see comments suggesting "factory resets before travel" or "dual booting". These are not things anyone really wants to have to do.
Also, this issue raises some more questions:
1) It sounds like they might use a device to scan your hardware automatically, potentially opening the door to copying files for permanent record
2) It is a small step from here to install tracking software on your device (as China is doing in some places)
I wish them much good luck with my elderly dumbphone, it has extremely little on it that wasn't there when it rolled out of the factory. Besides that, way to go to ruin your international reputation (not that anybody cares). Paying $5000 to be allowed to break the law is interesting too: so it's about the money? Or do you get fined and then you still have to cough up the contents of your devices?
Wouldn't it be possible to conveniently hide your usual filesystem from the border officers by using the new APFS shared-filesystems-in-single-container feature, without having to pre-allocate and waste space for an additional hidden data partition?
Just install macOS like you normally do, set it up with a user and some basic data. Then create a new partition in the same container and install what you normally use (or even clone the first one, if that's possible).
Then set the basic one as default boot source, and hold alt on boot to select the other one to get work done.
A light version of the "hidden encrypted volume" solution, without any risk of overwriting your files.
[+] [-] jliptzin|7 years ago|reply
It was extremely unnerving, they went through all our private pictures, messages, dropbox files, email, notes, dating apps, etc. It ruined the vacation for me, and I've stopped visiting Canada because of how disgusted I felt afterwards. I know Canada is not the only country doing that, so from now on when I cross an international border I wipe my phone (after backing up) and just have a few pictures and messages on there. Incidentally though, that's the only time it's happened to me.
[+] [-] yholio|7 years ago|reply
I have found practical success by booting from an encrypted Linux partition that has absolutely nothing relevant on it, with a weak password I can always enter when requested by big guys with guns. Unbeknown to them on the same partition there sits another encrypted volume, at some offset from the outer's partition start. If I fail to enter the correct password for the outer partition, Ubuntu drops into the command line of the initrd, that is equiped with all the tools you need to mount the real, offset partition:
So instead of having a nice GUI into which you directly enter the uber-secret password, you press enter a few times in the GUI, drop to command line, issue a single command and only then enter the uber-secret password. A mild nuisance in your bootup process, once you get the hang of it.It's impossible for any court forensic team, let alone an airport goon, to prove there is actually another partition inside the outer encrypted partition, unless you mount common volumes and cross-contaminate. An important caveat is to properly defragment the outer partition and fiddle with the offset and the size of the inner partition to prevent any conflicts, then avoid writing in the outer partition.
[+] [-] jackhack|7 years ago|reply
Access to physical phone/laptop is only the first step -- mark my words. Big Brother's bureaucrats are never satiated. Next, we will have demands for passwords and unrestricted access to : email, facebook, photo sharing, hacker news posts, social media, etc.
I see sudden spike in the market for burner phones. ANd a long-term opportunity for a company that can create a "burner" social media profile.
[+] [-] HarryHirsch|7 years ago|reply
Nitpick: in Catholic dogma purgatory is a place of purification, those in purgatory know that they are there for a reason and only for a certain time, afterwards they enter heaven. Hell on the other hand, is for eternity and ugly. That's why the two are easily distinguished in their iconography, both involve imagery of flames, but souls in purgatory look joyful and those in hell look despondent.
[+] [-] clarkmoody|7 years ago|reply
In a few short years, you are the ones who will be justifying any of the following on grounds that "they already do the less-invasive thing, why not one step more?"
- Mandatory fingerprinting (USA does this for foreigners in some airports)
- Declare all cash, declare all crypto (with addresses / xpubs)
- Bank account logins
- Register electronic devices / install software trackers
- Hair sample for drug testing
- Cheek swab for DNA
- Blood draw to check for diseases / drugs / DNA
[+] [-] crispyambulance|7 years ago|reply
Then, your online profile is going to get mined along with everyone else's, continuously, by multiple state-level organizations who cooperate with each other-- whether you've booked travel or not.
By the time folks get to a border it will just matter of diverting anyone with a "red X" next to their name.
[+] [-] djsumdog|7 years ago|reply
At least they banned software patents.
[+] [-] grkvlt|7 years ago|reply
That hardly seems like totalitarian overreach. In fact it seems quite restrained and pretty reasonable - and presumably must be intelligence led, since I rather doubt they are doing this at random...!
0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_busiest_airports_i...
[+] [-] ryandrake|7 years ago|reply
EDIT: I do this all the time and it’s not even remotely difficult or a big deal.
[+] [-] udfalkso|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tootahe45|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] plg|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Tloewald|7 years ago|reply
Is being searched before you get on a plane or enter a customs checkpoint some kind of hideous infringement of your civil liberties? No!
There’s no problem with this in principle. The problem is that it’s silly, and it causes a privacy and security violation while not accomplishing anything.
[+] [-] WaylonKenning|7 years ago|reply
We search things across borders for things our country does not want. We don't want drugs. We don't want fresh fruit (which will trip up more people than drugs).
We don't want child porn. And if a phone is a container for that content, we want to be able to explore the container.
Of course, there's a million different ways around this. Get burner phones. Store content in the cloud. Have seven firewalls. Whatever. But that doesn't change the concept of inspecting things across a border to make sure things we don't want, don't come in.
And if that's a totalitarian purgatory, then name a country (or external border for the EU) that isn't a totalitarian purgatory.
[+] [-] tomp|7 years ago|reply
Is this the new "think of the children"? The reasoning seems to be, criminals would rather carry their "digital crime-thingys" across the border saved on their phones, than upload it (encrypted) somewhere on the internet... Or is NZ planning to build a Firewall as well (better than China's)?
[+] [-] fghtr|7 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...
[+] [-] dawnerd|7 years ago|reply
I don’t think that’s a valid excuse to search devices though. If anything I think it proves work visas need to be more accessible so people don’t have to lie their way in for a job.
[+] [-] clubm8|7 years ago|reply
Yes, those are non-citizens requesting entry. This sounds like it applies to everyone - including NZ citizens.
And regardless, searches need to be proportional.
Full blown cavity/strip searches at random could cut down on the importation of illegal drugs, but civilized countries require a reasonable suspicion for invasive searches.
Why not apply that logic to digital devices?
[+] [-] lotsofpulp|7 years ago|reply
Edit: I also find it funny when people get passionate about their "free" country's national anthems when they're one bad underpaid, undereducated border patrol agent away from not having any rights.
[+] [-] mito88|7 years ago|reply
:)
[+] [-] keyme|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jjcm|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mandeepj|7 years ago|reply
Officer - Do you have multiple pins on your phone?
You - (if you say) No
Then you lied to an officer. They can also find it out.
[+] [-] chooseaname|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _v7gu|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ravenstine|7 years ago|reply
Granted, it's been very "totalitarian" when it comes to immigration for a long time. Not that I don't think they have the right to do this, but when I went to live there with my kiwi girlfriend, I had to give them actual copies of letters she and I sent each other and get a chest X-ray to prove that I'm not just taking advantage of their socialized medicine. So this sort of scrutiny isn't totally out of character for NZ, but the digital search is where it gets intolerable.
If NZ wants to innovate on anything or to have more movies filmed there, they'll have to do it mostly by themselves, or pay ass-loads to import skilled workers.
EDIT: I made a correction to a part that probably gave people the wrong impression. This was not meant to claim wrong of NZ. I love NZ, and they have every right. I only take issue with the digital search.
[+] [-] WaylonKenning|7 years ago|reply
If you're likely to be a drain on the public healthcare system, then you're not likely to get permission to live here. Why? It's not fair to those people who have already paid into the system, to subsidise someone who hasn't.
And we are picky. There's no visa lottery here. A points-based system with high thresholds. And that's OK. Same as Australia. Same as Canada.
[+] [-] djsumdog|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] flog|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lostlogin|7 years ago|reply
> We have a huge housing shortage
> get a chest X-ray to prove that I'm not just taking advantage of their socialized medicine.
We have a problem with TB. We have issues with other disease coming in too and don’t seem to screen for them, which we should.
> If NZ wants to innovate on anything or to have more movies filmed there, they'll have to do it mostly by themselves, or pay ass-loads to import skilled workers.
We do pay assloads. For some reason we subsidise the films that come here while they exploit their workers and get exemption from NZ laws. Our homegrown hero Peter Jackson had a role in that.
Your level of skepticism about NZ clearly indicates you belong here. Come back!
[+] [-] r1ch|7 years ago|reply
If they sit down with me and allow me to maintain control of the device while they ask to see recent chats and emails etc I would feel much more comfortable (though don't get me wrong, I still see the whole process as a huge overstep and invasion of privacy).
[+] [-] justtopost|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] capdeck|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] woofcat|7 years ago|reply
Photos, logout of Google, clean up downloads, etc.
I don't have anything to hide, however having some random customs dude go into Google Photos which has over a decade of my life documented doesn't seem exactly ideal.
[+] [-] the_snooze|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|7 years ago|reply
This law isn't too bad as far as a compromise bill goes. The problem is a lack of accountability. Three fixes and I'd be okay with it:
1) Officials must document their reasons for finding a "reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing";
2) Travellers should be able to challenge the search in a court proceeding to occur no later than close of business the next day (traveller must surrender their phone to the court in the interim, but is free to leave the airport after that); and
3) Searchers cannot (a) copy data from the phone while searching, (b) turn off airplane mode or (c) take more than [2] hours to conduct their search.
[+] [-] djsumdog|7 years ago|reply
Just from a basic security perspective, this is teaching citizens it's okay to give your password out to authorities, and that's just fucking terrible.
[+] [-] natch|7 years ago|reply
So:
4) All third parties (meaning people other than the traveler) who have their privacy violated in the process must be informed immediately of the full details of the privacy violation. Which communications, pictures, etc. were viewed and or copied and by whom, and how to follow up on these violations.
[+] [-] gsnedders|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] superkuh|7 years ago|reply
In the USA at least under third party doctorine that means none of that data is 'private' anymore and can be accessed without a warrant.
I don't know about NZ but I bet it's the same.
[+] [-] mavdi|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] titzer|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fluxsauce|7 years ago|reply
This makes me particularly uncomfortable. There should be reasonable grounds.
> Border officials searched roughly 540 electronic devices at New Zealand airports in 2017.
That does seem low, out of what I assume is hundreds of thousands of travelers. With that said, it still doesn't sound reasonable.
[+] [-] LeonM|7 years ago|reply
What files are they looking for on the device?
I mean, it's not like a terrorist will have a plan_to_place_bomb.doc file on their device, so what's the point? What file could there possibly be on any device that will threaten the security? And how is scanning devices going to prevent you from downloading that file after you go through customs?
[+] [-] rstuart4133|7 years ago|reply
But it would be nice if the phone manufacturers made it easier to side step.
Android is close already: it has multiple users. If it allowed you to hide a user (so you had to type in a name, for example), it would be mostly there.
One thing I really wish they would provide is a decent backup service, ie something that allowed you to backup everything on the phone, to an encrypted binary blob. Mainly I want this because having a backup that allows me to restore my data if the phone gets destroyed would help sleep easier at night, but of course it also solves this problem too: backup the phone to a hidden cloud account, factory reset it, restore it on arrival.
[+] [-] arriu|7 years ago|reply
Also, this issue raises some more questions:
1) It sounds like they might use a device to scan your hardware automatically, potentially opening the door to copying files for permanent record
2) It is a small step from here to install tracking software on your device (as China is doing in some places)
[+] [-] jacquesm|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m_eiman|7 years ago|reply
Just install macOS like you normally do, set it up with a user and some basic data. Then create a new partition in the same container and install what you normally use (or even clone the first one, if that's possible).
Then set the basic one as default boot source, and hold alt on boot to select the other one to get work done.
A light version of the "hidden encrypted volume" solution, without any risk of overwriting your files.
[+] [-] chrisper|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mark212|7 years ago|reply