Will You Let Airport Border Agents Access Your Phone & Laptop ?

dcep on 06/05/2019 - 19:39
Last edited 06/05/2019 - 20:00

Maybe it's just me living under the rock but just saw the news on some guy got his phone searched and denied entry after controversial video was found.

So I've looked it up and apparently border agents can confiscate your phone/laptop should you choose not to unlock/login the device for them to search.

Is that right? Will you just simply unlock your phone and let them browse whatever they want?
I mean some won't even let your partner unlock your phone let alone a stranger.

And the fact that even police needs warrant to exercise that, while border agents can do without one seems bizarre.

Travel

Comments

      • abb on 08/05/2019 - 14:24
        +2

        If you sync to the cloud, there's really no need to search your device at the airport, they already know what's on it!

    • funnysht on 07/05/2019 - 19:46

      i agree sometimes there's stuff that you just don't consider offensive but in said country may be.

  • altomic on 07/05/2019 - 14:34
    +2

    I fly a lot and have never had an electronic device searched.

    nor seen any one at an airport taken away to have their device searched.

    nor heard of anyone (friend, acquaintance or person on ozbargain) who has had their electronic device searched.

    I can understand coordinated international bureaus that are fighting child porn/trafficking/prostitution would be working with immigration/customs from most countries to track.catch people. i.e. people that are put onto airport watch lists for good reasons.

    • Baysew on 07/05/2019 - 14:41
      +1

      Which is probably the reason that this news item made the news - it doesn't happen on a regular basis.

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 07/05/2019 - 15:31
      +7

      Unfortunately it falls into the category of, just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

      • Scrooge McDuck on 07/05/2019 - 16:39
        +2

        We are all evidence of that. We were conceived but did not, nor want to see it happen.

    • [Deactivated] on 07/05/2019 - 17:28

      I have had my tablet taken and attempted to be unlocked. They did not ask me for the password, however. They would have had a look around had it not had a passcode, this was a few years ago. However the law changed at the end of last year, you now MUST provide them with the password to unlock/decrypt your device or you face 10 years in prison, not for having anything on your device, but simply for being unable or unwilling to provide a passcode.

    • 91rs on 08/05/2019 - 13:33

      +1 Fly more in a year than most will fly in a lifetime.
      Never had it happen (never been asked for devices, laptops etc), don't know of anyone who this has happened to (from colleagues who travel as often), never seen anyone being delayed and handing devices over or devices in the hands of customs officers.

      This isn't just a random event that happens to people, there would be some reason behind it.

      People seem to complain about this but how many people use random chargers and cables that come out of the wall at hotels and other places they don't know where they go or what they do? I'd be more wary of those situations than traveling and having a device taken off me.

      • Other on 08/05/2019 - 14:09
        +4

        Never had it happen

        so because it has never happened to you we should ignore it?

        Because 9/11 did not happen in Australia we should ignore it?

        If it happens to journalists, activists and whistle blowers we should ignore it?

        People seem to complain about this but how many people use random chargers and cables

        because most of the time, unless you are in North Korea or Cuba, its connected to the Hotels electricity supply and not the Government.

        • 91rs on 08/05/2019 - 14:46

          You're not comparing the similar situations there.
          It happens, I am not pretending it doesn't, however its not at the level people seem to think it happens and its not to the every day Ozbargainer either.
          When it does happen it is targeted, lets face it having your phone searched is better than getting in country before going in to an embassy and being chopped up in to bits after being tortured. Just because you get through customs doesn't mean nothing else can happen to you once you're there.

          Why only distrust Cuba or NK? Espionage isn't limited to those places, doesn't mean its government implemented either.
          Its a trust (or lack of) to expose yourself, little different to customs cloning your phone or laptop to access anything on it.

          • Other on 08/05/2019 - 15:23
            +3

            @91rs:

            You're not comparing the similar situations there.

            So what, - you basically said because it has not happened to me or someone I know, then we shouldn't have any issues with it.
            I was just reflecting the same attitude in my responses.

            however its not at the level people seem to think it happens and its not to the every day Ozbargainer either.

            So what - if it happens to ANY citizen, Not convicted of any crime, no matter if they are a activist or a whistle blower or an Ozbargainer I would hold that it is Not a positive development.

            When it does happen it is targeted,

            So because its targeted on certain individuals who have not broken any laws its acceptable?
            Im glad you think Journalists or people they know being detained at airports is a good thing (David Miranda is a good example).

            lets face it having your phone searched is better than getting in country before going in to an embassy and being chopped up in to bits after being tortured.

            So because the Australian Government does not torture people but can lock them up for not disclosing a p/w thats a positive thing?
            I would provide a third option, in which the democratically elected Government not only does Not torture its citizens, but also does not require them to give up their password on devices which not only track but also contains all the communications of a person. And if Customs, an organisation that is meant to protect the border of the Country (not enforce State laws), does want to search a phone they get a warrant from a Judge to do so, just like the Police.

            The appropriateness level should probably be set higher than 'torturing our own citizens'.

            Why only distrust Cuba or NK?

            My understanding is that in those countries they are interested in targeting everybody - the total domestic population and everybody who ever travels there, where as other countries like the US or EU tend not to want to wire every Hotel USB port back to Spy HQ, because they are focused on specific targets, and probably wouldn't like the backlash from the general population (Where as Cuba/NK couldn't care less).

  • Pricebeat on 07/05/2019 - 16:40
    +2

    Reminds of this

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKEdKdgi2hg

    • Zachary on 15/05/2019 - 18:26

      So Imagine telling your children "it's for your safety, so let this adult thoroughly grope you every day, and possibly strip search you".

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 07/05/2019 - 17:24
      +15

      Found the Customs Officer.

    • Jugganautx on 07/05/2019 - 19:26
      +4

      Got a few dirty vids from the mrs on my phone while working away. Dont want some grease monkey looking at my things 🤷🏻‍♂️

    • ThadtheChad on 08/05/2019 - 12:29

      Dank memes and Furry porn.

  • relentless on 07/05/2019 - 18:59
    +2

    Isn't it futile to refuse now that new encryption laws were recently passed with little to no outrage?

    • funnysht on 07/05/2019 - 19:51
      +1

      i think because most ppl were ignorant about these laws being passed…

    • cruiseronroad on 08/05/2019 - 08:05

      Ultimately different agencies accessing it at different times.

      Remains to be seen how these laws are actually implemented by the megacorps such as Apple or Google, yet I have no doubt they will comply.

    • [Deactivated] on 08/05/2019 - 08:57
      +1

      Yes, if you refuse to hand over your encryption keys, they can jail you for 10 years. Just like the good old communist days.

  • bobbified on 07/05/2019 - 20:05
    +1

    Years ago, a lot questionable content used to go back and forth via emails as chain mails. Emails would just get forwarded to huge lists of people and it'd get repeated over and over again. I'm not talking anything as extreme as pedo material, but there was always some objectionable/offensive content (not necessarily illegal) of which is subjective depending on who views it.

    Nowadays, all that content goes through phone chat apps such as whatsapp etc and it automatically saves in the phone. Happens a lot in the group chat conversations and I often just open and close whatever it is and just forget it. Most of it is meant to be funny, shocking, or just to gross people out.

    I'm pretty sure that if I was to ever get pulled up and had my phone searched, they'd be able to find something to pin on me and I'd have a hard time trying to explain whatever it is they ask.

    I'm also pretty sure that there's a whole bunch of us here who'd be in the same boat.

    As an Australian citizen, they have no choice but to let me back into the country. But in that situation elsewhere, I think I'd probably have a hard time to trying to get in.

  • Thundaja on 07/05/2019 - 21:07
    +31

    To everyone saying they don’t see the problem, or have nothing to hide - that’s not the point.

    Why do you close your curtains and blinds at night?
    What are you afraid of people seeing?

    Why do you post on the internet and not use your real name?
    What are you afraid of?

    Do you have any social media profiles set to Friends Only/Private? If so, why bother? What are you afraid of people seeing?

    Feel free to post your messaging history on Pastebin for all of us to enjoy. I’m sure people will find messages between you and your SO interesting.

    Don’t have a SO to message? What about all of your photos? Are you saying you don’t have a single photo on your devices that you wouldn’t feel uncomfortable about some stranger seeing?

    What about work and corporate information? Particularly with BYOD environments - if an officer makes a copy of your device that you have willingly handed over, you’ve probably violated your company security policy; not to mention handed over company IP, trade secrets, and/or confidential information. Hope you didn’t value your job.

    How do you know what the officers are doing with your phone?
    At the very least, if they make a copy/clone of the phone, where does that go? Who has access to that information? How long is it stored for? How is it secured?
    The Government is a prime target for cyber attacks and they’ve proven time and time again that they are terrible at storing people’s data securely.

    Having the attitude of “You have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide” is incredibly dangerous in today’s Information Age.

    It is a slippery slope. Be careful.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/05/2019 - 12:09
        +5

        There are always a few who would abuse any given right or privilege. How far as a society can we tolerate and how much we are willing to give away for it is the cost we have to think about collectively. Most people are good citizens but have to face the consequences for something they have no part in.

      • tebbybabes on 08/05/2019 - 12:25
        +3

        I don't have an alternative solution, but I'm still clicking negative - no offense intended.

        You saying that you have no issues about it doesn't mean that everyone won't. I also accept that your statement "Sometimes you lose your privacy to gain some protection" can be true. In fact, this happens all the time in society. We have cops that can search us or question us or others in order to protect the greater good.

        The main difference in the border control scenario is in regular civilian life, there must at the very least be probably cause. The way the regulations are written, at border control they have complete carte blanche. And because personal computing devices hold so much information about us and what we do that it is simply not acceptable for authorities to have complete access to it for no reason whatsoever.

        • boomramada on 08/05/2019 - 13:44
          -4

          So you don't have a solution, you just don't feel comfortable some law enforcement officer going through your personal info as a name of your protection? Which I don't get it. Issue is that, most who bring contraband or illegal immigrants are part of civilians. How else you screen them?

          If you not comfortable with these, why carrying your naked pics, company IP, trade secrets, and/or confidential information on your phone? Just remove them.

          • tebbybabes on 08/05/2019 - 17:16

            @boomramada: I'm not against capturing anything contraband or illegal. By their very nature, they are illegal. I'm against the draconian tactic of doing it. Yes, it serves to protect the public, but my personal opinion is the the privacy being given up is not commensurate with the benefit. I'm struggling to think of an analogy but I'll give it a shot. Let say that "activity A" is an illegal activity. And we all agree that "activity A" is a bad thing and we'd like to stop it. In the name of safety and eradicating "activity A," let's make everyone's houses completely transparent to law enforcement (without a system of checks and balances) so it will be possible to catch these instances of "activity A." Never mind if law enforcement can also see everything else that goes on in those houses - hey we're working to eradicate "activity A"

            Best analogy I could do.

            Anyway, I'm not saying I carry around my naked pics or company IP or trade secrets or confidential information, but by the very nature of how people use their phones and personal computing devices now, access to these devices, unless wiped or carefully prepared prior will yield all sorts of information that even if they were completely legal, would still constitute undue invasion of privacy.

      • ThadtheChad on 08/05/2019 - 12:35
        +3

        Sometimes you lose your privacy to gain some protection, so you ok for people with contraband, child porn, illegal immigrants or criminals freely enter to the any country? So what's your solution? just let them sneak in and do whatever they want?

        I'm sorry, but if you genuinely think proper organised crime gets caught out using these rudimentary power-plays, you are very misinformed. Most folk who are into illicit activities will actually have some basic opsec that thwarts all of this.

        So all this ends up doing is being a massive pain in the ass for everyone, and possibly catching a few clueless gronks. Is it worthwhile catching these few muppets by compromising the privacy of the entire populace? We have a system of warrants, so if there is something genuinely sus about someone, a warrant would be more appropriate IMHO.

        Didn't neg, btw.

        • boomramada on 08/05/2019 - 13:57
          -2

          I'm not saying trust all the law enforcement officers in the country. But system somehow works. There are more dumb criminals than smart once. I don't think smart criminals even would carry a phone or laptop with them.

          When you flying, just don't take your entire life with you.

          Is it worthwhile catching these few muppets? Yes or else why bother even having border control, let all come in? Lets deal with the bad fruits while they are here? :)

          • Zachary on 15/05/2019 - 18:35

            @boomramada: …so with all the dumb criminals gone, all we're left with are the smart ones….and how do you propose we catch them?

      • Thundaja on 08/05/2019 - 19:10
        +2

        Sometimes you lose your privacy to gain some protection, so you ok for people with contraband, child porn, illegal immigrants or criminals freely enter to the any country? So what's your solution? just let them sneak in and do whatever they want?

        This is a straw man argument, but ok.

        By your logic here, it would be justified if a law was passed that made hanging curtains illegal, as people could be engaging in criminal activity behind them and the police need to see into your home and verify that you are not.

        However in this scenario, while the police officers that went past your house can now see you aren’t hiding anything at home, you have no idea who else can see everything you do. Having a shower, taking a dump, bathing your children, intimacy with loved ones. In addition, everyone now has on open view to scope out your home and see where you keep your valuables and prized possessions.

        Also, a photo doesn’t have to be of something sexual or someone naked for it to be sensitive.

      • No ONE on 08/05/2019 - 22:13
        +1

        Why would people bother wasting their time replying sh*theads with no concept of freedom and privacy. Once a donkey, always a donkey.

    • trapper on 08/05/2019 - 12:17
      +8

      It is literally impossible to really know if you have 'something to hide'.

      Nobody knows every law on the books, and we are all basically walking around breaking all kinds of laws every day.

      This is why random fishing expeditions are generally considered unjust, everyone is guilty of something if you look hard enough.

      "Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime"

      • Other on 08/05/2019 - 14:34
        +2

        This.

        You keep passing enough laws to be able to criminalise most behaviour.
        As most people cannot keep up with the amount legislation passed, most will not see the slow, but constant erosion in removing their rights.

        Look at the first prosecution under QLD's Disestablishment laws (cannot associate with others) - it was used on a disable individual, hardly a criminal kingpin which we the public were promised that it would be used on.

        The other strategy is to dramatically increase the sentences of crimes, thereby forcing people to either co-operate or risk going to jail for a decade or more. This is used very effectively in the US (where Federal prosecutors have a 90% success rate in criminal prosecutions).

        It can even be done in a commercial sense - I spoke to a guy who syndicates commercial loans (in the US), he told me every investor is basically in breach of their loan contract as soon as they sign the dotted line, and of course everyone knows it, but nobody cares, because how else do you get the money? I would not be surprised if its exactly the same here. Thats why I laugh when people read all their mortgage docs.

        • Zachary on 15/05/2019 - 18:38

          But doesn't reading the doc so you know what you're signing into…?

    • Zachary on 15/05/2019 - 18:30

      Actually those are some valid points now that you've elaborated why against such a thing……I think I'll take back my earlier statement of opposition, on another thread which I can't be arsed to link and find here….

  • MessyG on 07/05/2019 - 22:02
    +3

    Interesting thread and comments and I do find it concerning. Not for my own personal privacy, all they're going to get off my gear is frightening medical pictures that will make them wish they never checked. But I can think of many many scenarios in which data can be accessed and moved on for vested interests. I don't trust border security, anyone can be bought and information is power and money. I wouldn't travel with my laptop, I wouldn't want my hard drive cloned for no reason and all my personal stuff examined for no reason. Should they have access to it? I hate the idea, but these measures are also part of harm prevention and they do work. What I would like to see is strict rules and standards about how the data is stored and used, and what security is in place, as well as an audit trail and what the plan for deletion is in the long term if nothing of concern is found.

    People said the same thing about CCTV and invasion of privacy 20 years ago and I don't think those fears really panned out (if anything it's been essential in reducing crime). This is clearly not the same, it's like walking into your home, taking your filing cabinet and your diary, photocopying the contents and not telling you a damn thing about what they're going to do with it. Once they've got that information, are there access logs? Does it log who reads it? What they do with it? Where it's sent? Does it expire?

    I really don't like the way our government approaches (or like, doesn't at all) data security. Our government (both sides) have always been regressive when it comes to the Internet and they just don't seem to understand the implications these knee-jerk powers can have until after the fact. And they'll convene a team of experts, get their recommendations, then completely ignore them because it wont make a good headline/score votes.

    TLDR; See the need for it, very uncomfortable with it.

    • Other on 08/05/2019 - 14:46
      +4

      CCTV… if anything it's been essential in reducing crime

      I doubt that - from memory the evidence has shown thats its useful for catching the perpetrators but does not prevent crime at all.
      Go look at London, where cameras are everywhere, but knife crime has dramatically increased.

      invasion of privacy 20 years ago and I don't think those fears really panned out

      Go look at China, and their social scores. Those fears should be playing out now.

      I remember privacy advocates fear that people would be targeted. It didn't really happen because operators couldn't really remember that many people/faces, but now we can thanks to software and your pictures on driving licence and passport. As an example, they can film previous protests (that happened many years ago) and identify all the participants. Or They they can find out who who protesters meet up with. That worries me.

      • MessyG on 08/05/2019 - 21:42

        Ok poor choice of words - but catching perpetrators is also good. Face recognition concerns me too.

        • Diji1 on 08/05/2019 - 23:53
          +2

          but catching perpetrators is also good

          That doesn't reduce crime though.

    • Diji1 on 08/05/2019 - 23:52
      +3

      The Greens do not support the security state.

      They have voted against every major privacy violation that the Laberal Parties have attacked Australians with.

      Of course Australian voters are brainwashed fools and won't vote for The Greens, they'll vote for one of the two parties that has been removing their rights and their money for the last 30 years.

  • THICKnSLOW on 08/05/2019 - 05:30
    -2

    Since airfares are cheap now, maybe airports can charge a service fee or subscription towards 'normies' who declare they don't terrorist, don't pedo, don't bestialitize animals, or have good reason to value their privacy so exempt them from having their data devices searched.

    Bit like tolls roads so people get to destinations 5 minutes quicker due to the amount of traffic on toll roads balance out traffic on normal roads.

  • Spam Service on 08/05/2019 - 08:28
    +2

    We've had the same discussion where I work - we are an IT company and sometimes have sensitive client data which - by law - we can't share with anyone outside of our company. That doesn't override the border control's laws of course, but it does indicate a legal grey area and an awkwardness with our clients we'd rather not deal with.

    One policy discussed was to have the tech ops department lock the contents of the computer without providing the password to the passenger. The passenger can then get tech ops to unlock at the other end. This ensures that any attempt to access the data in the computer will fail whether by border force or by any other entity. The passenger cannot be fined/imprisoned for not unlocking the computer, as they physically can't.If border force want to access the computer, they'll need to deal with the company lawyers - something they'd avoid in most cases.

    • regenade on 08/05/2019 - 23:31
      -2

      Lol why would Border Security even bother about lawyers. If you don't know the password or state that the decryption password is with your company techops, you will be detained till Border get hold of company Tech ops. I will rather hand over it to Border Ops and then let them due to their duty and the your copnay lawyers ransack DIBP and claim damages. The DIBP has paid $10B+ in damage claims which goes under the carpet

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/05/2019 - 09:37
      +1

      Only one problem with your plan. Bye bye device. It will never get to the destination.

      • Spam Service on 09/05/2019 - 10:34

        If that happens for our company, it's just too bad - but it's better than sharing our confidential data. It's also unlikely to happen - border force are unlikely to demand access to confidential data belonging to a legitimate Australian business without reasonable suspicion, even though that might happen to a single guy with a beard and his laptop.

        • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/05/2019 - 12:39

          You'd be sharing regardless. They'll confiscate the device or clone the device. They'll have a copy.

          Customs currently can't demand access - that happens later via a Court Order.

          I'd just get staff to use a VPN if it was me.

  • Strahany on 08/05/2019 - 09:04
    +2

    Interesting story from Canada (different laws, I know) about a lawyer who refused to disclose passwords due to sensitive information.

    This raises the question about lawyer-client and practitioner-patient confidentiality, which would be breached in any search.

    https://youtu.be/qrG-tttvdSY

  • Peck on 08/05/2019 - 09:56
    -6

    I am very disappointed in OzB with this thread - Lots of tips here for potential importers of prohibited imports etc. who want to hide records and information.
    People here would like the system tied up in Warrants. If Border force had to justify every baggage exam to a magistrate, then the system would grind to a halt. A lot of baggage exams are done on 'gut feeling'.
    I had my bags done at Sydney airport, and handed over my PIN. All finished in 5 minutes and out the exit doors.

    • dcep on 08/05/2019 - 10:47
      +4

      I had my bags done at Sydney airport, and handed over my PIN. All finished in 5 minutes and out the exit doors.

      No one here is talking about bags.

      If you're here to argue, bags = phone/laptop/camera contents

      then so be it.

    • abb on 08/05/2019 - 14:29

      You can search bags for explosives & weapons with an xray.

      Is there a certain sequence of 1s and 0s that might be on my phone that can kill everyone in a 100m radius? No. So why should I be subject to a search without probable cause?

      It starts at "child abuse material", which we all agree is horrible, but then it soon enough becomes "movies not rated by the local censors", "copyright infringement", and "religions and politics that the local regime opposes"…

      • Cluster on 08/05/2019 - 16:20

        I know people who travel for business, and they are forbidden (threat of firing with further sanctions) if they leave work documents unencrypted on a laptop. They travel with business proposals and contracts with international partners accessible via the laptops. Turn it over to some guy working for a foreign government? No way.

      • ssyl9 on 08/05/2019 - 16:49
        +2

        Then soon it becomes

        "Having too many drunk photos on facebook page"

        "Sent out texts/posts talking crap about our country"

        "Did not Hail our supreme leader everyday in texts",

        Like where will it stop

    • ssyl9 on 08/05/2019 - 16:46
      +2

      The problem is that border security will ask you to unencrypt phones and laptops and they don't just browse it.. .they copy all data on it

      And I have my personal phone store info for a reason, I want to keep images or text exchanges with my partner/spouse that is a bit kinky. Or I want to keep company or client info like passwords or details that I need and might forget…

      why do I HAVE TO wipe my phone if I don't want anyone else accessing the data? And wouldn't a WIPED PHONE raise more alarm bells?

  • wallet72 on 08/05/2019 - 11:42

    I have issues with the people that can make the on the spot decision to ruin your trip. The majority of them are just hard workers trying to make a living. Except there's enough bad apples to make the whole travelling experience a bit nerve wracking.

    Look at me funny, that's a strip search
    Big boobs, that's a strip search
    I had a a bad night sleep, yup, strip search
    You got something to say? Better detain you for review
    Hell, I just don't like you - entry denied

    Wanna complain about it? Sure, when you get back home
    Official reason and paperwork? Don't have to give you one

  • trapper on 08/05/2019 - 11:58
    +5

    After you unlock they don't just 'browse' your device btw, they take em away and clone all the data. :)

    • Thundaja on 08/05/2019 - 19:16
      +1

      Yep. Which is arguably the biggest issue here. How do you know where that data goes, how secure it is, and how has access to it? You don’t. The Government isn’t some solid entity - it is made up of thousands of people and all it takes is one to access that data when they shouldn’t.

      If Border Agents were only browsing data and you could see what they were doing at all times, it would still be ridiculous but I can see a lot more people being ok with it simply to prove they’re not a criminal.

    • Zachary on 15/05/2019 - 18:44

      …how do you know? Do you work as one? Or been told by one?

  • Cluster on 08/05/2019 - 15:19
    +3

    It's already common standard practice for business travelers to have blank phones and encrypted laptops and log in remotely when visiting certain countries.

  • lostn on 08/05/2019 - 17:06

    Carry a spare phone and give them that one.

  • CalmLemons on 08/05/2019 - 19:28

    Really? I've never had my phone or laptop checked.

    I'm surprised security agents would even be smart enough to navigate through the file systems well enough to find anything.

    I guess it's just stupid people looking for stupid people doing stupid stuff?

    • Clear on 08/05/2019 - 20:55
      +1

      I'm surprised security agents would even be smart enough to navigate through the file systems well enough to find anything.

      The officers who approach you are usually not the ones who will do the investigation. There are a lot of different kind of experts behind the scene.

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/05/2019 - 09:40
      +1

      If you're an Australian citizen, they likely just take your device, clone it, and let you on your way.

      A visitor they would have a tech examine it immediately.

      If something is found later, expect a knock on the front door at 2am.

  • Exorcist on 08/05/2019 - 20:33

    source?

  • Dreamcast on 08/05/2019 - 22:33

    Only if they strip search me ;)

    • filfa on 09/05/2019 - 12:30
      +4

      "Why isn't his FaceID working ?!?!"

      "I don't use my face (;"

  • Diji1 on 08/05/2019 - 23:39
    +2

    Relevant.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6y4u8VhhPo

    Australian Government agencies are much worse than this. For example within six weeks of metadata database going live there was widespread abuse by dozens of non-law enforcement based agencies like councils, gambling commissions and animal welfare agencies.

  • bob the builder on 09/05/2019 - 00:20
    +2

    It may be fine if everyones privacy is equally breached based upon suspicion, however we fail to realise it's not equal. The politicians are exempt from all of these laws. Corrupt as they get

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 09/05/2019 - 09:42

      The adversary they refer to does not mean government departments.

      They can, and easily will, locate hidden containers or systems.

  • Noophe on 09/05/2019 - 09:35
    +3

    they'd have to trawl through thousands of spicy memes on my phone

  • filfa on 09/05/2019 - 12:29
    +7

    I have enough memes on my phone to have me banned from the whole of Europe.

  • windowshopper on 09/05/2019 - 22:07

    Samsung flagship phones have Knox encrypted partition which functions as a separate encrypted phone. I don't know of anything that can break it yet if your password is strong enough. I think encryption is linked to the device hardware too.

    You basically run your two of an app on the phone. Have private files etc.

  • Bid Sniper on 10/05/2019 - 10:19

    I think this will be for people that are known to authorities that are on some kind of watch list (terrorist, pedophile etc…) and flying to and from high risk places.

    Cant see this working for random searches, boarding will take days otherwise.

    • petry on 11/05/2019 - 10:36
      +1

      'will be' - its here now.

      its used whenever someone feels like it -like if they fancy your partner enough and reckon you might have some pics…

      if anyone thinks real terrorists and professional criminals wouldn't be aware of this then they're lacking…

      its about reaching out to ordinary people and being able to harass and criminalise them.

      theres no requirement to being on a watch list or being a person of interest…..

  • DaddysBelt on 10/05/2019 - 12:24

    Happened to me on my way home from Amsterdam. After almost 30 hours travelling I had to spend close to 2 hours in the airport with my girlfriend wondering what had happened.

    The officers were friendly but it left me with a terrible taste in my mouth.

  • tictoc2 on 10/05/2019 - 16:38

    What if the USB port doesn't work? I have an old tablet that I might bring overseas but the USB port stopped working a while ago, I charge it wirelessly.

    • Strahany on 10/05/2019 - 16:53

      If it has a microSD slot, they might be petty enough to have some on hand to clone across via that method.

      • tictoc2 on 10/05/2019 - 17:11

        Nexus 7. No microSD. I just hope they don't take it away but I wouldn't put it past them

  • Strahany on 10/05/2019 - 16:49

    Whilst I thought the best course of action would be to backup and wipe your phone prior to travel, I feel like there’s an easier solution.

    -Backup phone
    -Prior to passing through any customs checkpoints, navigate to the “Factory Reset” section in your phone’s settings, then lock the screen
    -If they ask for your phone, unlock it and hit that beautiful reset button; who doesn’t love a bit of a pseudo-scorched earth approach?
    -If they don’t, then you get to pass on through without the hassle of restoring data for no reason

    • tictoc2 on 11/05/2019 - 09:43

      I'm going to back up to the cloud, factory reset, link my android to a second email, share Google drive travel folder and calendar from my first email to second email.

      • petry on 11/05/2019 - 14:29

        or leave your phone at home and buy a burner at duty free…

        • tictoc2 on 11/05/2019 - 15:34

          I like to use the camera on my phone

  • Zachary on 15/05/2019 - 18:47

    ….or you could just pilot a plane yourself(Or be friends with someone who does and doesn't care for any of this) and not worry about being frisked by anyone else…..

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join