Hacker News Reader

I was asked this in London in 2016 outside Embankment tube. I declined and impolitely suggested that the officer should piss off or arrest me. He didn’t take the matter any further after eyeing up the probability that I’d sue them.

The point is really that a lot of people are intimidated and compliant and will hand a device over when requested. This is never a good thing. Even if you’re legitimately a victim, you shouldn’t even let them at your stuff.

Was that drug related? What was officer’s motivation/aim if you know by any chance?

I wasn’t party to the reason but you’re probably right.

>The point is really that a lot of people are intimidated and compliant and will hand a device over when requested. This is never a good thing. Even if you’re legitimately a victim, you shouldn’t even let them at your stuff.

That's addressed by the OP

>People spoiled by western TV shows may talk about probably cause, privacy, rights etc. (which may exist on paper in these places too), but you’d be in a lot of trouble if you’re not very rich and know powerful people. These checks can also take an ethnic or other angle where only certain people are stopped.

There's a strong legal system (eg. due process, habeas corpus) that protects you in uk. No such system exists in Russia. Similarly, if you tried pulling this in china, and you're a Uyghur, that's just going to end up with you in a reeducation camp.

> There's a strong legal system (eg. due process, habeas corpus) that protects you in uk

Sometimes the authorities appear to have the law on their side, examples included people detained under the Terrorism Act(s)[0] and those who are singled out by the police under "stop and search" powers[1]

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwal...

[1] https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/analyses/no-105-u...

> The point is really that a lot of people are intimidated and compliant and will hand a device over when requested. This is never a good thing. Even if you’re legitimately a victim, you shouldn’t even let them at your stuff.

Did you read the parents comment? Resistance might work in the UK but in places like India, unless you’re well connected the police can make your life miserable.

It doesn’t always work in the UK though. If I wasn’t white and middle class and looked poor then the outcome would be different.

Really most people don’t have the ability to defend themselves from this and the police know that.

The problem is that this is where the downward spiral starts.

Yup. ICO investigations into this practice: https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2617838/ico...

and https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2620095/ico...

The U.K. isn’t “such places”. There are plenty of places where the cops are so indemnified and corrupt that it’d make your head spin. You have little choice but to go with the shakedown (it’s often a bribe they want), unless you are prepared to go to jail and face unknown consequences on a point of principle.

I’ve been there, I’ve done that, I keep a €50 in my passport when travelling in those parts, it’s acceptable identification if it’s what they’re after, if it isn’t, it was in there accidentally.

This ^. You know what's up.

yeah bribes are very common and still quite dangerous, if they think you have more to offer you may find yourself with an after-hours follow-up visit… after one bad experience I try to have a decoy answer available to the “where are you staying” question.

I would only do that if I had something on my phone that carries heavier punishment than bribing an officer.

I think it’s a mistake to think that as a foreigner you can just do as the locals do when it comes to bribery. It could end very badly. Doing it to avoid some inconvenience is a bad idea.

What you have on your phone is likely immaterial in the equation - the mindset is one of sunk costs - once they’ve stopped you for a search, they’ll want to have something to show for their time - either to bring you in, or a bribe. You absolutely have to read the situation, and gauge how it’s likely to go down. I can tell you that in Russia, 95% of the time a bribe is wanted. The other 5%, usually greenhorns, you just work up their chain of command until you find the guy who will take the bribe. I’ve been frogmarched to a cop shop in Bishkek by an excited rookie who caught a foreigner smoking a cigarette, only to end up being given a name to drop for future occasions by his commandant after giving him €100 for a birthday gift for his daughter. Whole thing was ridiculous.

It’s also worth noting that if you are an obvious foreigner, you will be a bribe magnet, and will be accosted only in the hope of a bribe.

It’s not so much about avoiding inconvenience, it’s about moving freely in a police state.

I recently had a passport check within Schengen that wasn't on list of temporary exceptions [1]. I did not have it in me to say no even when I knew it was very likely illegal. I might not have gotten officially arrested, but they would have likely taken me off the train and thus having to buy a new ticket and lose 2 hours of my day.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/policies/schengen-borders-...

As long as two hours of your time is worth more to you then maintaining basic civil rights... you deserve neither. Especially in schengen countries.

You are saying that because of my action (not refusing a illegal check) I don't deserve basic civil rights? Seriously...

The implication isn't that you personally don't deserve them, but rather that any rights you think you deserve if you're not willing to stand up for them will likely be taken from you in time.

In many European continental law countries - notably France but many others, you can be asked to present a national identification card (or passport, if foreign) by police/government security at any time and are expected to be able to comply. This is independent of Schengen or border control - it also applies to residents of the country going about their normal business.

This was Germany, where the same is true. However it's not allowed to use that as a stand-in for a border control. European Regulation is quite explicit on internal Schengen borders:

> 23(a) the exercise of police powers by the competent authorities of the Member States under national law, insofar as the exercise of those powers does not have an effect equivalent to border checks; that shall also apply in border areas. Within the meaning of the first sentence, the exercise of police powers may not, in particular, be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks when the police measures:

> (i) do not have border control as an objective;

> (ii) are based on general police information and experience regarding possible threats to public security and aim, in particular, to combat cross-border crime;

> (iii) are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders;

> (iv) are carried out on the basis of spot-checks;

This check likely broke both 23(a)(i) and 23(a)(iii), as at the first train stop past the border everyone was asked to present ID.

[1] Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code)

What you've described may not necessarily be the "equivalent to the exercise of border checks".

That depends on what would have happened had you not complied. In France if you are unable to produce an acceptable ID, you're taken to a police station where you're held until your identity is established. Once established, you'd have been allowed to go your way.

It would only constitute "the exercise of border checks" if the response to your non-compliance was to escort you back to the country where you boarded the train.

I'd be surprised if that's what generally happens. One instance I observed on a train going through Switzerland involved an English-speaking student. It took a while but after some discussion and the police making a few phone calls seemingly to their satisfaction, warning her to carry appropriate ID in future.

>It would only constitute "the exercise of border checks" if the response to your non-compliance was to escort you back to the country where you boarded the train.

Not true according to the regulation:

> ‘border control’ means the activity carried out at a border, in accordance with and for the purposes of this Regulation, in response exclusively to an intention to cross or the act of crossing that border, regardless of any other consideration, consisting of border checks and border surveillance;

Note, it covers "response to crossing a border" and includes "border surveillance".

edit:

For full context:

> ‘border checks’ means the checks carried out at border crossing points, to ensure that persons, including their means of transport and the objects in their possession, may be authorised to enter the territory of the Member States or authorised to leave it;

> ‘border surveillance’ means the surveillance of borders between border crossing points and the surveillance of border crossing points outside the fixed opening hours, in order to prevent persons from circumventing border checks;

Try doing the same while being black in the US. Being arrested would be the best outcome that you wish would happen to you.

This is utter nonsense.

You need to get some perspective bud.

Funny to see how delusional the replies to this are

Wasn't this also A Thing not that long ago with people flying to America?

Yes, TSA can ask you to unlock your phone and automatically grabs data from it, on iOS you can get around the automatic grab by pair locking your device: https://arkadiyt.com/2019/10/07/pair-locking-your-iphone-wit...

EFF also have a nice guide called "Digital Privacy at the U.S. Border" (PDF): https://www.eff.org/files/2018/01/11/digital-privacy-border-...

I’ve never once been asked to unlock my phone at a TSA checkpoint. How common is this?

Common enough for the EFF to have an article about it.

The EFF article never mentions the TSA once.

https://www.eff.org/issues/travel-screening

Given that the only TSA reference in that article also mentions the Bush administration, I would hope there is more up to date information now. I wonder why EFF has not updated a top level issue page in so long.

The article may not mention the TSA by names but if you were in doubt about the entities that you could encounter at the US border then probably the article wasn't meant for you anyway.

Maybe the parent poster means US Customs and Border protection? That’s different from the TSA which could potentially search you leaving the country, or on internal flights.

Fair enough, for travelers the distinction is useful so let's spell it out: TSA: the guys that mess around in your luggage, make you throw away your water so you can buy new bottles at 5x the price as well as your nailclippers. CBP: the guys that check your passport and possibly your fingerprint, take your picture and invade your privacy as much as they feel like.

Both of these can be found at US airports with international flights(and most countries have equivalents). Going on an international trip you will encounter both, for a domestic flight you will only deal with the TSA.

The EFF article is aimed exclusively at people crossing the border so it about the CBP, not about the TSA. If you never leave the USA or never travel to it then you will encounter none of this.

Uhh... you’re a sample size of one?

Nah, he’s a US citizen that understands the TSA is the entity that handles security for flight boarding, and has no relationship with ICE handling security at the border. Some other people in this thread seem to be okay conflating the two, but I’m not sure that’s very helpful —- everyone knows that border controls for all countries are massively more strict that controls for domestic travel.

To be clear this is about going through customs as you enter the country through an airport, not domestic flights. I’m not sure if that organization falls under tsa or not.

Happened to me.

Went to secondary to get more information on my trip, then just routinely searched my bags and electric devices. I was allowed into the country after they got more information.

Happened to my wife’s close friend as she crossed the border. They found years-old texts between her and her ex-bf joking about marrying for a green card and she was denied entry into the US and given a 10 year ban for immigration fraud even tho she had been living there under H1B (which was close to expiring) and had to fly back to her home country with just the clothes in her suitcase. Her sister who was a citizen had to sell all her things for her. It was a disaster.

>on iOS you can get around the automatic grab by pair locking your device

Not really? In the same guide it says

>If you later want to remove this restriction you can Remove -> Profiles... in Configurator, analogous to step 15.

Basically, you're just hoping that the minimum wage employee at the TSA doesn't know about removing the profile.

Isn't that a step that has to take place on the paired laptop?

Earlier the article says

> This setting controls when someone can remove the profile from within the phone itself. If it’s left as the default value of “Always” then anyone with access to your unlocked phone could remove the pair lock (which would defeat the entire purpose). You can either set it to Never to never allow removing the profile, or With Authorization and set a password to allow removing the profile with the given password (this might be useful to remove the pairing restriction if you do lose access to your laptop).

That step can't be performed from a computer that's not already trusted by the iOS device. I.e., it can only be the one it's pair-locked to.

I wouldn't be surprised - their ESTA form has a mandatory question which requires applicants to list all their social media accounts.

Maybe this is different from country to country but when I open the ESA Website it says that this is an optional question that might become mandatory in the future.

Looks like it was optional until 2020, then became compulsory.

https://usaestaonline.com/esta-social-media-question

Throwaway account, but this is very much like the "member of the Nazi party" question: of no practical value (border guards don't know the entire Nazi membership archive by heart, of course) unless they need to throw the book at you for some other perceived slight (i.e. involved in some political protest that is not an actual crime? HE LIED ON ENTRY FORM, IMMEDIATE EXPULSION!).

So if you don't plan to commit crimes or otherwise confront the authorities, you can leave that blank, or use throwaways. Just don't give your real info, because they will use it to analyse you for real.

A few years ago I ordered some items from a small online shop located in an east-of-central European country. A few days before I received the package I noticed that one of the recent searches on my linkedin account was from someone in that country's customs office. Not sure if they were bored and curious or working through their customs protocol.

I went through ESTA last winter and it was optional.

I think at the moment there is the soft problem of delays in results or potential rejection for unknown reasons. You also don't have to tell them who you're staying with either but a rejection can be pretty devastating so there is a strong incentive to give more than what is explicitly required. It was clear such encroachments on civil liberates were coming so I've never done anything on my social accounts that would upset the establishment, so even in my own case it has had a chilling effect.

If my memory serves me right, it was mandatory to mention the first address I went to, but social media was clearly marked as optional. I put GitHub, it worked fine.

My point is that it’s unknown if not stating it would impact the application so people would err on the side of caution and compliance.

Which by itself is a pretty good reason to never travel to the USA.

You think this is unique?

Does that matter? It's disgusting.

It kind of does when you are using it as a silly “whataboutism”.

You mean like you did? Agreed, that's silly.

Maybe not unique but it is definitely not ubiquitous - plenty of countries that let you visit without that bs.

The fact that you asked rather than shared a link or something, combined with the fact that most of the replies seem to not even comprehend the differences between the TSA and CBP/ICE makes me suspect this is a bunch of bs.

I'm not American and haven't been there in 38 years and I'm not a cyborg plugged into the internet with infinite, instant recall, but a cursory Google informs me that I'm not entirely delusional (/or a foreign agent spreading misinformation), as this was indeed a cause of concern about 8 years ago:

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/foreign-travelers-soc...

Whether it was actual policy or not, I'll leave to you to work out.

As for the format of my response, I was genuinely not 100% sure, so felt it respectful to post thusly. Does that satisfy your needless suspicion?

War torn Russia, India?! In 2021 I was stopped by criminal police in Germany and they demanded to unlock all my smartphones, then dedicated personnel arriving in separate car browsed each of them. Once they discovered that I have multiple smartphones on me they went nuts and were certain I'm their target. Apparently transiting through Germany by car and stopping during the night in center of one major city associated me with some criminal group active nearby. I knew that had I refused, they'd virtually confiscate all devices. After all they refused to identify themselves. Screw you Kriminalpolizei Dummkopfs, you wasted your useless time and resources on me.

True, more and more countries are doing this.

https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/tsa-electronics-rights/

https://thewire.in/tech/kashmir-police-vpn-smartphone-checki...

been there. done that.

you simply cannot refuse. i have tried that and have marks on my back to prove it. you hold your head down while a dumb illiterate Sepoy goes through your phone and there is absolutely nothing you can do. don't try to act smart because they will see that as a sign that your are their enemy and by that point, your goose is cooked. they label you a terrorist and jail you sans recourse.

there are 12 year olds who are in jail for "waging war against india" and the circumstances are not much different. there is a concept of "preventive detention" whereby the police and the security aparatus is authorised to arrest and hold you behind bars BEFORE you commit a crime or even if they think you might or had but they have no evidence of it and they can still get you. no habeas corpus, no hearings, no chargesheets, no trial. you are condemned unheard and the judiciary can all but cheer for the police.

Seems like a simple solution would be to carry two phones. If you are stopped hand over the clean one keep the real one out of sight.

Or install a second OS.

In your mind how does this scenario play out?

Are you just living in the "second OS"? Meaning you don't actually use your phone while you are outside? Or are you going to just casually reboot your phone and boot into the "second OS" while the officer is standing there demanding your phone?

I believe there are some setups where one password unlocks your normal OS and user accounts and another password unlocks your phone under a second user with no indication of a second available.

Buying two (smart) phones and running simcards on both sounds complex and expensive.

Simpler would be a 2nd way to unlock the phone into a fake user account...

I have done this with my laptop for years traveling internationally. If you don't press the right key at the right time you are greeted by windows.

I seem to remember that Android supports multiple user accounts, no?

Sounds like a simple way to end up getting much greater scrutiny in a room somewhere for at least few hours.

This "simple" solution would make my life way more complicated. Not to mention expensive.

Your second phone could be an old Nokia 1110.

I still have to pay for a second cell phone account, keep it charged, and use up a pocket carrying it everywhere.

have you heard about body searches? where will you keep your two phones?

Doesn’t sound like that is what is happening here. Don’t let perfect get in the way of good enough at least in the short term.

I only travel with my backup phone with a fresh re-install.

The main thing is it is nice to get away from the main phone on a trip and enjoy the trip. Losing it would not be the end of the world.

All these other aspects you get for free.

> even one of the top officials said that it’s not illegal when people cooperate and hand over their phones.

Would this not be the case in the US?

My ex-girlfriend is Canadian and made a hop in the US on her way to visit Mexico. US agent in the airport insinuated that she was a prostitute or being sex trafficked and made her unlock her phone to prove otherwise. He read messages on Tinder and various messenger apps and made ridiculous comments about the content of some messages. "Ok, ok. It looks like you're a good girl."

Since checking phones is legal, when you try to complain about it, it's like trying to find someone who cares that a cop made rude remarks when he pulled you over.

It's a great system.

This is a bit different though, because it is at a border crossing - where your rights are explicitly curtailed.

True. Just blows my mind how people get treated.

Are there any mods where I can input a dummy password which opens a dummy iOS with boring messages and limited info / photos?

There should be a second account you could log in to on phones when you use a special access code.

This second account could have an innocuous looking call history and social media profile.

Yes. What people don't understand is that much (maybe most) of the world is like this.

If we rephrase that to be "the world is like this where most people live", then, yeah.

"you’d be better off unlocking and handing over your phone"

You would in the short term, if you're a coward and unable to stand up to this kind of abuse. In the long term, if everyone stood up to this abhorrent behavior, it would stop.

Everyone is a warrior at their keyboard. In real life, a quick mention of the metaphorical wrench and everyone complies.

You sound just like the people who are telling others to stop doing their jobs in the name of ethics.

Yeah in a better world we could all just not be "cowards" and stand up against unjust searches, but most of us don't want to spend couple nights in lock up over this kind of shit.