Recent DHS "edict" on electronic devices

Seems that the DHS can take any electronic device they feel like when a person enters the US, even citizens. This previously unrevealed program seems to include any data storage device, including but not limited to memory cards and cameras.
Their definition in the main abstract reads:
An electronic device is defined as "any device capable of storing information in digital or analog form" including hard drives, compact discs, DVDs, cameras, flash drives, portable music players, cell phones, pagers, beepers, and videotapes.

http://www.nasdaq.com …f%20Laptops%20A​t%20Border

WTF is going on with these people? I would be REALLY PO'd fi they took my camera or my CF cards or laptop for an "indefinite period of time".

They've seen too many movies of gestapo types shouting "Show me your papers!", and are obviously enjoying playing out the fantasy in real life also.

I'm wondering how this would apply if you were out of country, burned all images taken to DVDs and mailed them to yourself so you didn't have to chance customs confiscating memory cards, portable storage devices, etc. Does the manpower exist to monitor shipped packages and how is that stuff scanned?

It gets worse. In Australia, they're considering having Customs officers check for and confiscate 'commercial quantities' of illegal MP3s on iPods etc. How exactly they determine whether or not it's illegal is unclear, as is the definition of 'commercial quantity.'

It seems that George Orwell has become a prophet, not a writer.

CannedHeat wrote in post #6042848
how this would apply if you were out of country, burned all images taken to DVDs and mailed them to yourself so you didn't have to chance customs confiscating

Do you not think that international mail goes through Customs also?

http://www.schneier.co​m …6/01/us_customs​_open.html

Domestic First Class mail is supposedly still private, though I'm skeptical of even that at this point.

Riff Raff wrote in post #6044068
Do you not think that international mail goes through Customs also?

Yes, but the sheer volume of mail would make it logistically impossible to check each parcel without a staff of a million... or more.

They save on manpower by only checking those letters containing objects dark on x-ray machines, like CF cards.

This story is just a re hash of old news. Media hype.
No, your rights aren't suddenly being eroded.
ICE(Customs) has always had the right to check computers and
other electronic gear. Same goes for every country on the planet.
ICE was simply cleaning/clarifying their procedures and the media needed
a headline.
I certainly wouldn't be too worried about being targeted for a search.
Do you really think they have time to search every laptop and media card that
comes into the country!
Dave

wyofizz wrote in post #6047727
ICE(Customs) has always had the right to check computers and other electronic gear.

The difference now is that they're additionally insisting that they have the right to then confiscate them anytime they feel like, with no probable cause, and hold on to them for as long as they want. They're also free to copy all data you may have on that equipment, and keep that in their records forever. In other words, you apparently have no property rights whatsoever to anything that can store information of some sort when crossing the U.S. border.

Duh, the gullible American public allowed this Orwellian state to come into being, with the searches at airports security checkpoints which so often fail to detect weapons. Overheard at a security checkpoint, "I'm glad they are doing this...I feel so much safer!" Yeah, lady, delude yourself some more about what they find and what little that means to your personal travel security, compared to the inconvenience and time lost in security lines! Makes me feel like taking a photo (10 second self timer) of yourself mooning the viewer, as the last shot in the camera, and the first one to show up if they security nitwit wants to 'search'

They took my brain at a check point....
Don't know when I will get it back..............

Riff Raff wrote in post #6047991
hold on to them for as long as they want. They're also free to copy all data you may have on that equipment, and keep that in their records forever. .

Not true.
Here's a link to the actual policy.
www.cdp.gov/linkhandle​r/cgov/travel/admissab​ility/search_authority​.ctt/search_authority.​pdf

Law enforcement has always had the right to seize with probable cause and then hold with proper authority/court order.

Dave

The key point is that the DHS says they don't even need probable cause or a warrant to do so, when you're crossing the U.S. border. They can just do what they want.

http://www.cdt.org …CBP%20Search%20​Policy.pdf

"In the course of a border search, and absent individualized suspicion, officers can review and analyze the information transported by any individual attempting to enter, reenter, depart, pass through, or reside in the United States"

"Officers may detain documents and electronic devices, or copies thereof, for a reasonable period of time to perform a thorough border search. The search may take place on-site or at an off-site location."

That's from a policy document dated 7/16/08. BTW, regarding what was mentioned earlier about mailing/shipping items instead:

"Letters carried by individuals or private carriers such as DHL, UPS, or Federal Express, for example, are not considered to be mail, even if they are stamped, and thus are subject to a border search as provided in this policy."

First Class mail is supposedly still private.

[QUOTE=Riff Raff;6051206]The key point is that the DHS says they don't even need probable cause or a warrant to do so, when you're crossing the U.S. border. They can just do what they want.

Absolutely right. It's always been this way with anything you bring across the border. My point is how some people are getting all fluffed up by the media about something that has taken place for years.
They will need some type of court order to keep your property however. Again no different then any other criminal or civil case.

Dave