PDA

View Full Version : PCs can be seized from travellers


Fjold
08-01-2008, 2:49 PM
Wow!

U.S. agents can seize travelers' laptops


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. federal agents have been given new powers to seize travelers' laptops and other electronic devices at the border and hold them for unspecified periods the Washington Post reported on Friday.

Under recently disclosed Department of Homeland Security policies, such seizures may be carried out without suspicion of wrongdoing, the newspaper said, quoting policies issued on July 16 by two DHS agencies.

Agents are empowered to share the contents of seized computers with other agencies and private entities for data decryption and other reasons, the newspaper said.

DHS officials said the policies applied to anyone entering the country, including U.S. citizens, and were needed to prevent terrorism.

The measures have long been in place but were only disclosed in July, under pressure from civil liberties and business travel groups acting on reports that increasing numbers of international travelers had had their laptops, cellphones and other digital devices removed and examined.

The policies cover hard drives, flash drives, cell phones, iPods, pagers, beepers, and video and audio tapes -- as well as books, pamphlets and other written materials, the report said.

The policies require federal agents to take measures to protect business information and attorney-client privileged material. They stipulate that any copies of the data must be destroyed when a review is completed and no probable cause exists to keep the information

bohoki
08-01-2008, 2:58 PM
this is pretty weird

well i hope they find some more child porn peeps

seems to me any sensitive info could be got from through internets after they get to america

also you really think they can find the 8 gig micro sd under a bandaid on my knee

http://podfeet.com/NosillaCast/NC_2006_08_27/micro_sd_card.jpg

__________________
i quote zoidberg when i chant "freedom,freedom,freedom,hey"
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e366/bohoki/Zoidberg-freedom-dance-futurama-204.gif

Ironchef
08-01-2008, 3:02 PM
Yeah, and I'm sure this new violation of all things sacred and holy will work! Surely them baddies will never think of transporting their secret turrist data through other means.

Dog bless America where a little security is worth lots of lost freedom!!

wildcard
08-01-2008, 3:20 PM
Dog bless America where a little security is worth lots of lost freedom!!

Now that's a funny typo..

tombinghamthegreat
08-01-2008, 3:24 PM
http://www.2privacy.com/www/image/adsImg/ClearHistory.gif

I will remember this when traveling. Also this is a violation of the 4th amendment, i don't need the government intruding into my business.

Ironchef
08-01-2008, 3:30 PM
Now that's a funny typo..

An intended typo since i don't take the Lord's name in vain. I may swear and cuss, but I won't use his name in vain.

http://www.2privacy.com/www/image/adsImg/ClearHistory.gif

I will remember this when traveling. Also this is a violation of the 4th amendment, i don't need the government intruding into my business.

4th and 14th, right? Even though it's for foreigners inbound to our airports, those civil rights should apply.

Wulf
08-01-2008, 3:31 PM
Sounds like a great way for the TSA guys to get new material for their iPods.

Bill_in_SD
08-01-2008, 3:36 PM
Truecrypt.org for Military grade encryption before it is banned.... :-)

tombinghamthegreat
08-01-2008, 3:37 PM
4th and 14th, right? Even though it's for foreigners inbound to our airports, those civil rights should apply.

Yes they should apply but then again the constitution is no longer applied and it appears the Bush adminstration views all foriegners as possible terriorist.

jerryg1776
08-01-2008, 3:40 PM
also you really think they can find the 8 gig micro sd under a bandaid on my knee
http://podfeet.com/NosillaCast/NC_2006_08_27/micro_sd_card.jpg

__________________
Well when you enter the country they can make you declare all electronic devices or magnetic media on a form. If you do not and they catch you with that little bitty 8 gig SD micro card.... well can you say do not pass go - go directly to jail! Are you willing to violate federal law and risk your rights and gun rights and become a new felon?

I don't think they will be relying on the honor system without some type of hammer to drop in the background on people who think its cute to play games and hide stuff.

Also.. they could make you place all magnetic media out for inspection.. and if you had any on you when you walked through the safety zone.. ZAP.. all gone!

If it were my new law thats what I would do! Course I am an *******.

Fjold
08-01-2008, 4:16 PM
An intended typo since i don't take the Lord's name in vain. I may swear and cuss, but I won't use his name in vain.



4th and 14th, right? Even though it's for foreigners inbound to our airports, those civil rights should apply.


Better read the story again:

"DHS officials said the policies applied to anyone entering the country, including U.S. citizens, and were needed to prevent terrorism."

bulgron
08-01-2008, 4:17 PM
GNU Privacy Guard here:

http://www.gnupg.org/

For encrypted email, pretty much any modern email client, plus a free Thwate Personal Email Digital Certificate here:

http://www.thawte.com/secure-email/personal-email-certificates/index.html

Note that in order for that to work, the person you are sending email to has to also have a digital certificate and you have to have their public key. Really, everyone should be digitally signing and encrypting their personal email whenever possible, especially now that the US Government is showing itself ready and willing to monitor all electronic messages.

For international travel, the best solution is to get a decent ISP that offers a login shell with scp access, then transfer all your really important data over the internet to that account before crossing borders. That way, if they snag your electronic storage devices at the border, you still have access to all your most important data. I use bluehost (http://www.bluehost.com/) for my domain ISP ($8.95/mo), but there are a ton of options out there.

Bishop
08-01-2008, 4:35 PM
There is almost no reason why physical media would be transferred into the states when the internet is far more vast and unregulated. There ARE unbreakable forms of encryption (though they are cumbersome), and laws like this are just another excuse for feds to rifle through your stuff.

this is pretty weird

well i hope they find some more child porn peeps

Don't believe for a second that the pieces of trash who keep child porn would be so stupid as to store it on their person. Though such an argument is likely one we will hear if this is ever challenged. Lately, it seems all the gov has to do to shut up constitutional nay-sayers is raise the spectre of child molesters.

"Of course we have to have the right to look at the contents of random peoples' hard drives, it'll help us catch child molesters! You don't support child molesters, do you?!"

pnkssbtz
08-01-2008, 4:54 PM
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of Human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." - William Pitt, British House of Commons, November 18, 1783


Think of the Children!

lehn20
08-01-2008, 5:48 PM
wow, police state!. What is next! Bunch of BS.

BB63Squid
08-01-2008, 6:14 PM
There are some good safeguards mentioned here already to protect your privacy. Let me add a few to the pot that I have personal knowledge of.


Eraser (http://www.heidi.ie/node/6)

iISystem Wiper (http://www.download.com/iISystem-Wiper/3000-2144_4-10074236.html)

CCCleaner (http://www.ccleaner.com/download)

TrueCrypt (http://www.truecrypt.org/downloads.php)

WokMaster1
08-01-2008, 6:18 PM
this is pretty weird

well i hope they find some more child porn peeps

seems to me any sensitive info could be got from through internets after they get to america

also you really think they can find the 8 gig micro sd under a bandaid on my knee

http://podfeet.com/NosillaCast/NC_2006_08_27/micro_sd_card.jpg

__________________

Mr Bohoki, step this way please. Take off all your clothes, bend over, spread those arse cheeks & say AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! (as the agent inserts a 8" digital probe up your blank!, he saw the bandaid .....to be continued>>>:D

bwiese
08-01-2008, 6:22 PM
Before people get all hotheaded, for ages the President/executive branch has had very strong powers in the customs/border arena. This is really just a reassertion of those and not anything new.

Even decades ago a border agent could inspect a package crossing the US border with you, and seize if for further investigation if thought to be contraband or controlled.

Bishop
08-01-2008, 7:10 PM
Before people get all hotheaded, for ages the President/executive branch has had very strong powers in the customs/border arena. This is really just a reassertion of those and not anything new.

Even decades ago a border agent could inspect a package crossing the US border with you, and seize if for further investigation if thought to be contraband or controlled.

Searching your package for importation violations seems a bit different than copying all forms of electronic media, and thumbing through your files for arbitrary violations. Especially considering electronic media is not technically physical. I understand that there are exportation rules regarding cryptography, but there is little reason to control importation of data that the gov could deem "sensitive" when the internet crosses international borders, and transmits so much data that checking for all but the most obvious bits would be impossible.

The idea that the nation's physical border constitutes some form of electronic frontier is misguided at best.

Electronic and data security is something the gov misunderstands deeply. Right now, the gov's only tool is a hammer, and when something doesn't look like a nail, they squint real hard. Honest mistakes are going to land people in federal prison.

LECTRIKHED
08-01-2008, 7:35 PM
I guess since they have the interenet bugged, they now need to keep an eye on physical data coming in by foot. Complete BS.

If you're concerned about people stealing your sensitive financial info, use one of the previously mentioned encryption. I would not trust customs with "safe guarding" my private financial info or anything else. With the number of hackers out there, this would be a prime target.

Satex
08-01-2008, 7:48 PM
There ARE unbreakable forms of encryption.

No such thing as "unbreakable" forms of encryption. You should read "The code breakers"
(http://www.amazon.com/Codebreakers-Comprehensive-History-Communication-Internet/dp/0684831309/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217648825&sr=1-1) to see what happens to "unbreakable" forms of encryption.

The only valid point is that many govts don't want to admit which crypto they can break and how, so low priority investigations go nowhere.

Fjold
08-01-2008, 8:23 PM
No such thing as "unbreakable" forms of encryption. You should read "The code breakers"
(http://www.amazon.com/Codebreakers-Comprehensive-History-Communication-Internet/dp/0684831309/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217648825&sr=1-1) to see what happens to "unbreakable" forms of encryption.

The only valid point is that many govts don't want to admit which crypto they can break and how, so low priority investigations go nowhere.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhh

Let people live in their fantasy world.

QuarterBoreGunner
08-01-2008, 8:28 PM
No worries at all.
Ironkey (https://www.ironkey.com/) wins.

Bishop
08-01-2008, 9:06 PM
No such thing as "unbreakable" forms of encryption. You should read "The code breakers"
(http://www.amazon.com/Codebreakers-Comprehensive-History-Communication-Internet/dp/0684831309/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217648825&sr=1-1) to see what happens to "unbreakable" forms of encryption.

If you are implying that the incidence of space radiation in the form of cosmic rays used to generate truly random numbers has some form of measurable repetition suitable for mathematics to decipher, the scientific community would be very interested in your findings...

The ability to decipher encryption depends on the predictability of keys used in the encryption process. It then depends on the ability to decipher the repetition or period adjustment of the key. When coupled with a semi-predictable pattern (such as the english language) it becomes possible to break codes with enough time and computing power.

Use of truly random numbers coupled with a simple xor that does NOT use repetition (which is also NEVER reused) is currently unbreakable.

The simplicity of the encryption is its strength. There is no mathematical "shortcut," seed, or algorithm to be discovered.

odysseus
08-01-2008, 10:31 PM
Many forms of crypto are currently impossible, or reasonably not possible for every day excursions, to break. The well established crypto methods are hardend and there are open challenges to crack them. This issue is always with implementation. How is the software coded (open to side attack)? How is it generating keys? Is the password even secure from a bruteforce attack by a CPU farm? If done right it is damn tightened down. I agree, the NSA/FBI/ABC group of your choice, does not want to affirm crackage if they can. However if they are on your butt, well you got something to worry about there...

I agree - these seizures are an overstep when applied to US citizens returning home. Like usual the Gov will overstep to assert maximum use of power. It is up to the people to ratchet it back. I hope Congress addresses this soon and the people push back from this obvious data collection tactic. I find it disgusting and a insult to the Constitution to copy my data. Is it acceptable that they photocopy too all my books, notes, ledgers, and private letters I may have on me too? Same thing, right?

Now for the BIG Question. What happens if they find a crypto file\drive\dir\container\etc... and then ask for the password to open it, and you say No? Sure I have nothing illegal, but I have my privacy.

It seems they are only copying the data to wack at it while you go on your way, but if they did there are serious issues as to the handling of data integrity. Just what if the agent asks and you say No?
.

Satex
08-01-2008, 11:02 PM
The simplicity of the encryption is its strength. There is no mathematical "shortcut," seed, or algorithm to be discovered.

You need to catch up on what's been going on in the crypto world for the past decade or so ;)

mymonkeyman
08-01-2008, 11:18 PM
An intended typo since i don't take the Lord's name in vain. I may swear and cuss, but I won't use his name in vain.



4th and 14th, right? Even though it's for foreigners inbound to our airports, those civil rights should apply.

14th amendment only applies to the states, this is the federal government (maybe you are thinking of the 5th amendment due process clause).

It's not for only foreigners, it's also for citizens, and falls under some made up BS by the Supreme Court called the border search exception. This isn't news though, they have been doing it for a while. They target single white men traveling alone internationally (often to countries with severe child prostitution problems).

Telperion
08-02-2008, 12:16 AM
You need to catch up on what's been going on in the crypto world for the past decade or so ;)
Care to post your bona fides in the crypto world? Hard to believe someone who knows "what's been going on" can claim there's "no such thing as unbreakable" and doesn't know what a one time pad is.

domokun
08-02-2008, 12:22 AM
My question is what are the corporate lawyers going to say when Joe DHS Agent looks at a bunch of classified company files with sensitive information without the agent having a NDA signed?

If such information gets leaked out to their competitors, would it be grounds to sue DHS for damages and such?

domokun
08-02-2008, 12:28 AM
Care to post your bona fides in the crypto world? Hard to believe someone who knows "what's been going on" can claim there's "no such thing as unbreakable" and doesn't know what a one time pad is.

They don't have to crack it because they can just demand you hand over the private key or enter the password to unlock the data via aggressive interview techniques under the guise of protecting national security and hold you until you capitulate or call for your lawyer.

Telperion
08-02-2008, 12:38 AM
Unbreakable by cryptanalysis then, which was the context in which the remark was made. :rolleyes:

BillCA
08-02-2008, 12:58 AM
They don't have to crack it because they can just demand you hand over the private key or enter the password to unlock the data via aggressive interview techniques under the guise of protecting national security and hold you until you capitulate or call for your lawyer.

It is your right to refuse to talk to government agents under the 5th Amendment when you do not have council present. Repeat the mantra I refuse to discuss anything with you until my attorney is present.

My view, it is questionable whether they can hold you at all, even if your stuff is encrypted. They can make a copy of the contents and analyze it all they want. Where is the need for further detention?

Of course, in today's electronic age, a laptop PC is the 21st Century equivilant of a combination of one's personal journal, appointment book, address book, personal and business correspondence, personal information and more. To most of us, I believe, allowing customs/immigration authorities to copy and read your electronic data is the same as letting them rummage through your desk at home.

dexter9659
08-02-2008, 1:32 AM
My brother goes to school in Canada. He was detained for 4 hours while in line coming through customs. Seems he met some profile they had for a clean shaven, short blond haired kid (due to having 7 calics). They took his laptop, cloned it, then told them they will be tracking his internet activity. After cloning his computer, Seattle's finest FBI agents told him he was a member of a white supremacist group. This was news to him. My advice is to dye your hair brown and not shave when going through airports now.

domokun
08-02-2008, 2:26 AM
It is your right to refuse to talk to government agents under the 5th Amendment when you do not have council present. Repeat the mantra I refuse to discuss anything with you until my attorney is present.

My view, it is questionable whether they can hold you at all, even if your stuff is encrypted. They can make a copy of the contents and analyze it all they want. Where is the need for further detention?

Of course, in today's electronic age, a laptop PC is the 21st Century equivilant of a combination of one's personal journal, appointment book, address book, personal and business correspondence, personal information and more. To most of us, I believe, allowing customs/immigration authorities to copy and read your electronic data is the same as letting them rummage through your desk at home.

I believe some how Intellectual Property protection laws also come into play here if they clone your company issued laptop to rummage around through it when it contains confidential company information such as proprietary design schematics, non-public financial data, etc. Knowing how well the TSA/DHS works to keep this stuff confidential while actually having the possibility to misplace/leak such data into the general public accidentally is appalling?

It makes me wonder if companies like Apple/HP/Lockheed Martin/Loral Space & Communications would let DHS/TSA clone the hard drives of their company issued laptops when their employees return from a business trip abroad...:whistling:

cbn620
08-02-2008, 2:51 AM
Wow. Wow. Sometimes I just get chills from the information overload of it all, in fact the sheer absurdity of it. Does the Constitution mean anything to anyone anymore? Left, right, Democrat, Republican, it doesn't really matter to them. This nation is slowly but surely ascending into fascism.

Repeal the PATRIOT Act and abolish the DHS. These people are tyrants.

Adonlude
08-02-2008, 9:14 AM
The first time I heard about this law it was presented in the article I read as being for the purpose of combating illegal downloading and copyright infringement.

odysseus
08-02-2008, 9:15 AM
Of course, in today's electronic age, a laptop PC is the 21st Century equivilant of a combination of one's personal journal, appointment book, address book, personal and business correspondence, personal information and more. To most of us, I believe, allowing customs/immigration authorities to copy and read your electronic data is the same as letting them rummage through your desk at home.

That's exactly the contention that needs to be applied to these issues. It is one thing for Custom agents\DHS to inspect your items looking for you to be smuggling something in or have dangerous materials in your presence with a chain of custody of said material. It is COMPLETELY something else to copy your personal\corporate data and store, read, analyse, and hack at it. Digital or on paper is no different.

People need to WAKE UP.

.

odysseus
08-02-2008, 9:19 AM
They don't have to crack it because they can just demand you hand over the private key or enter the password to unlock the data via aggressive interview techniques under the guise of protecting national security and hold you until you capitulate or call for your lawyer.

That's the thing. In the UK it is a crime in itself to have an encrypted file and deny access to the key to a government agent, punishable by prison term until you release said key.

In our country for the love and grace of God himself, we have our Constitution. I do not believe you can be forced in duress to release any private key for simply coming across the border on a legal international trip, coming home - it is not a crime. However I am not naive to think that in this day and age with new powers of the DHS, that it might be the case that they can apply duress to you. I am wondering about open cases or any cases in regards to this. Sure they may clone your hard drive, memory card, etc - and then come visit you later at your home, asking for a key with a threat for noncompliance.

This whole thing is a bowl of sadness.

.

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 4:48 PM
They are only going to go through your electronic media if they have reasonable suspicion (although they do not need reasonable supspicion)that there is illegal material on it, they are not viewing,copying,cloning the electronic media from everyone who arrives from out of the country.

As for the comment by someone here who stated that they have to declare their electronic media. You only need to declare any items aquired outside the U.S. So if it was bought in the U.S. you do not need to declare it and items that were bought in the U.S. that are serialized, there is a form that you can fill out that proves that the items are U.S. goods returned.

Customs and Border Protections can search someone or goods entering the country under the border search exception without probable cause,so there is no violation of the 4th amendment.

Theseus
08-02-2008, 5:05 PM
So you mean they might not like the idea of a hard drive that is programed to eat itself if they try to turn on the computer without the right code?

Hm...Better turn off that program!:angel:

Big O
08-02-2008, 6:28 PM
Customs and Border Protections can search someone or goods entering the country under the border search exception without probable cause,so there is no violation of the 4th amendment.
They were given the exception to be able to search for dangerous items that can threaten the immediate safety of the aircraft. These items are weapons, gardening and other tools that can be used as a weapon, explosive materials, chemicals, etc.

If dangerous items are found in a passenger's luggage or person, then probable cause to commit crime has been established and they can copy and clone away. But data on a laptop is not an immediate threat to the safety of the aircraft, therefore it becomes a law enforcement item, meaning standard law enforcement procedures should be followed.

This reminds me of the literal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, people that think they are entitled to their howitzers and nukes simply because the 2nd Amendment provides the right to bear arms. Just because they didn't mention it when it was written, doesn't mean it's a free-for-all, buy yourself a surplus RPG.

So in essence, it is violating the spirit of the law. The 4th Amendment states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... It is unreasonable to think data on a laptop can threaten the safety of the aircraft.

This too qualifies as surrendering basic liberties for temporary "security," in which case you deserve neither. I use the word "security" loosely, because the amount of extra security we gain is questionable at best.

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 7:15 PM
They were given the exception to be able to search for dangerous items that can threaten the immediate safety of the aircraft. These items are weapons, gardening and other tools that can be used as a weapon, explosive materials, chemicals, etc.

Actually your wrong. The safety of the aircraft is not the responsibility of Customs and Border Protection. What is coming into the country or exiting the country is their responsibility.

If dangerous items are found in a passenger's luggage or person, then probable cause to commit crime has been established and they can copy and clone away. But data on a laptop is not an immediate threat to the safety of the aircraft, therefore it becomes a law enforcement item, meaning standard law enforcement procedures should be followed.

Wrong again. See my above comment. If Customs and Border Protection required probable cause to stop and search someone entering the U.S. then every criminal could commit crimes un-abated because there would be no way Customs and Border Protection could develop PC to stop anyone unless a detector dog alerted to a vehicle or person. Detector dogs are used for narco,concealed human detection, agriculture,currency how do you expect to catch the child predators, wanted felons, terrorists, and other violators where a detector dog will not work?

This reminds me of the literal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, people that think they are entitled to their howitzers and nukes simply because the 2nd Amendment provides the right to bear arms. Just because they didn't mention it when it was written, doesn't mean it's a free-for-all, buy yourself a surplus RPG.

So in essence, it is violating the spirit of the law. The 4th Amendment states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... It is unreasonable to think data on a laptop can threaten the safety of the aircraft.

Again, Customs and Border Protection are not responsible for the safety of aircraft.

This too qualifies as surrendering basic liberties for temporary "security," in which case you deserve neither. I use the word "security" loosely, because the amount of extra security we gain is questionable at best.

I find it funny how you want it both ways. You are ok with the idea of limiting someones 2A rights (surrendering a basic liberty) but get riled up and want a literal interpretation of your 4A rights.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Your use of the above quote is hypocritical in my opinion because you apply it to one basic right then throw it out on another basic right.

The border search exception only applies at the border or functional equivalent of a border unless nexus has been maintained. It has been upheld by multiple courts including SCOTUS.

Do you have a better idea or should we just let anything and everyone just waltz right into the country?

Big O
08-02-2008, 8:22 PM
I find it funny how you want it both ways. You are ok with the idea of limiting someones 2A rights (surrendering a basic liberty) but get riled up and want a literal interpretation of your 4A rights.
Nukes are not basic liberty. But you're correct about the rest. I went off in the wrong direction. I forgot about CBP and was thinking about TSA the whole time.

I still don't think rummaging through our electronic devices is something they should be allowed to do though.

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 8:35 PM
Nukes are not basic liberty. But you're correct about the rest. I went off in the wrong direction. I forgot about CBP and was thinking about TSA the whole time.

I still don't think rummaging through our electronic devices is something they should be allowed to do though.


They don't rummage through everyones electronic devices they only go through them if they feel there is a reason too. An example would be what are called "love tours", these are groups of pedefiles who travel overseas to have sex and molest kids. These predators bring their electronic media with them to record their exploits and then try and get that electronic media back into the country.

If Customs and Border Protection didn't have the border search exemption these predators would be able to bring back child porn with impunity. They also wouldn't be able to catch the military hardware and restricted items from leaving the country and landing in the hands of our enemies.

Big O
08-02-2008, 8:51 PM
They may not rummage through everyone's electronic devices, but they are free to do so and that is what I have a problem with. With power comes abuse.

There are ways other than fishing expeditions to catch sexual predators.

As far as military hardware and restricted items leaving the country, CBP doesn't search when you exit the country, they search when you enter. They probably can search when you exit, but I don't think it's something they routinely do.

Draven
08-02-2008, 9:01 PM
And your one-time pad encryption can be broken. I guess no one here read the article on Anandtech about the supercooled quantum processors that are now in production? What do you think quantum processors are good for?

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 9:02 PM
They may not rummage through everyone's electronic devices, but they are free to do so and that is what I have a problem with. With power comes abuse.

I have yet to see that abuse in the 10+ years I have been connected to U.S. Customs/CBP so the fear is unwarranted.

There are ways other than fishing expeditions to catch sexual predators.

Fishing expeditions? How is searching someone who the officer has reasonable suspicion (which may be based on intell or other factors)that the person is a child predator a fishing expedition? Enlighten me on how it should be done so that way all the pedophiles and criminals can be caught?

As far as military hardware and restricted items leaving the country, CBP doesn't search when you exit the country, they search when you enter. They probably can search when you exit, but I don't think it's something they routinely do.

Actually they search quite a bit when people leave the country and have the authority to do so and you would be suprised on what they find trying to leave the country.

Big O
08-02-2008, 9:40 PM
I have yet to see that abuse in the 10+ years I have been connected to U.S. Customs/CBP so the fear is unwarranted.
Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened or it won't happen. Here's one example of a CBP Officer gone bad (http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/070730elpaso.htm). Spare me the Google searches to get more because we know they're there. And just because they get caught smuggling aliens, drugs or bribery doesn't mean they won't violate my rights entering or leaving the country.

In case you're interested, here's a site dedicated to cops gone bad (http://www.badcopnews.com/). Yes, I know most cops are great and interested in enforcing laws by the book and all that. But some of them do go bad. Remember Rampart? I know that's local, but most LE draws from the same pool. That's why you can't have unlimited power, there must be limits and oversight.

Enlighten me on how it should be done so that way all the pedophiles and criminals can be caught?
Why don't we just put up police and military checkpoints all over town, every intersection. Baghdad style. They can search cars for illegal weapons, drugs, terrorists, DUI, etc. Check your electronic devices and maybe even a body cavity or two. Does that sound like a good idea to you? Probably not. That's why. Why don't we let the CBP worry about protecting national security, enforce customs laws and protect the border and let other agencies handle regular crime.

Dateline NBC seems to have found a way to catch sexual predators. I'm no cop, but here's a couple off the top of my head. Other than the Dateline way, how about working with local agencies where the crimes occur? The countries that receive economic aid, make it a requirement of that aid. When all else fails, put the ones that get caught in general population and word will spread quickly. Lets see how well that works.

Actually they search quite a bit when people leave the country and have the authority to do so and you would be suprised on what they find trying to leave the country.
This time, I did not question whether or not they have the authority. But I travel overseas on average twice a year (not counting Canada & Mexico) and never have seen a CBP uniform on my way out. Behind the scenes and out of view maybe, but not as a regular routine matter.

james s
08-02-2008, 9:47 PM
"An example would be what are called "love tours", these are groups of pedefiles who travel overseas to have sex and molest kids. These predators bring their electronic media with them to record their exploits and then try and get that electronic media back into the country."

Or how about...

California gun owners going to Nevada or Arizona to buy magazines and return to California with them.

Random searches are always ok when it comes to something that we would not be possessing ( like child porn) , but where does it stop. How would we feel if there were checkpoints in our neighborhoods?

Big O
08-02-2008, 10:12 PM
Do you have a better idea or should we just let anything and everyone just waltz right into the country?
Does the non inspection of electronic devices constitute "waltzing right into the country?" Or did I inadvertently suggest removing all border checkpoints and eliminating ICE and CBP? I don't remember doing that. Please, do explain.

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 10:17 PM
Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened or it won't happen. Here's one example of a CBP Officer gone bad (http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/070730elpaso.htm). Spare me the Google searches to get more because we know they're there. And just because they get caught smuggling aliens, drugs or bribery doesn't mean they won't violate my rights entering or leaving the country.

In case you're interested, here's a site dedicated to cops gone bad (http://www.badcopnews.com/). Yes, I know most cops are great and interested in enforcing laws by the book and all that. But some of them do go bad. Remember Rampart? I know that's local, but most LE draws from the same pool. That's why you can't have unlimited power, there must be limits and oversight.

True, there are some bad ones in the bunch, as there are in any profession but you still haven't showed me where there is a wide spread abuse of the border search exemption. Show me where CBP has unlimited power?


Why don't we just put up police and military checkpoints all over town, every intersection. Baghdad style. They can search cars for illegal weapons, drugs, terrorists, DUI, etc. Check your electronic devices and maybe even a body cavity or two. Does that sound like a good idea to you? Probably not. That's why. Why don't we let the CBP worry about protecting national security, enforce customs laws and protect the border and let other agencies handle regular crime.

So what your telling me is that CBP should let murders up the road or child predators and terrorists waltz right though? Tell me how letting a murderer or terrorist up the road is protecting the border? Tie CBP's hands behind their backs then hold them responsible if one of them gets through. You do know that CBP is a law enforcement agency right?


Dateline NBC seems to have found a way to catch sexual predators. I'm no cop, but here's a couple off the top of my head. Other than the Dateline way, how about working with local agencies where the crimes occur? The countries that receive economic aid, make it a requirement of that aid. When all else fails, put the ones that get caught in general population and word will spread quickly. Lets see how well that works.

And so has CBP, however, you don't like it, it's called the border search exemption, which according to SCOTUS is reasonable. CBP uses alot of the same techniques that the local agencies do, plus a few more they don't have access to,they also work with local agencies all the time, not only in enforcement operation but in the sharing of information.


This time, I did not question whether or not they have the authority. But I travel overseas on average twice a year (not counting Canada & Mexico) and never have seen a CBP uniform on my way out. Behind the scenes and out of view maybe, but not as a regular routine matter.

Really, how does travelling twice a year qualify you to make that assumption? I have been at a functional equivalent of a border and the actual border for over ten years and have seen it quite a bit. When I worked outbound flights in plain clothes at LAX and while working as a canine officer at the border of Mexico on average 5 days a week, 365 days a year.

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 10:42 PM
Does the non inspection of electronic devices constitute "waltzing right into the country?"

If not being allowed to check the terrorist's or pedaphiles electronic media makes the difference whether we catch them or not then yes by not being able to check it they are waltzing right into the country.

Or did I inadvertently suggest removing all border checkpoints and eliminating ICE and CBP? I don't remember doing that. Please, do explain.

Removal of the border search exemption would eliminate CBP's ability to catch these criminals before they get into the country, therefore eliminating the reason for being there. Are you in favor of eliminating the border search exemption?

lrdchivalry
08-02-2008, 10:55 PM
"An example would be what are called "love tours", these are groups of pedefiles who travel overseas to have sex and molest kids. These predators bring their electronic media with them to record their exploits and then try and get that electronic media back into the country."

Or how about...

California gun owners going to Nevada or Arizona to buy magazines and return to California with them.

Random searches are always ok when it comes to something that we would not be possessing ( like child porn) , but where does it stop. How would we feel if there were checkpoints in our neighborhoods?

Can you show me where there have been random checkpoints for magazines or AW for that matter?

I hear what your saying and that is why the border search exemption is limited to the border or functional equivalent of a border (international airport and free trade zones). As I have said in other posts, without it CBP would not be able to develop PC because they would not even be able to talk to anyone.

By not having the border search exemption you tie their hands behind their back, yet hold them responsible if someone/something bad gets through.

Big O
08-02-2008, 11:40 PM
True, there are some bad ones in the bunch, as there are in any profession but you still haven't showed me where there is a wide spread abuse of the border search exemption. Show me where CBP has unlimited power?
You are the one advocating unlimited power. You don't want rules or oversight of the electronic seizures, or at least that's what you have led me to believe. Is that not the case?

I don't have a wide spread abuse of the Border Search Exemption. But at least we agree that there are always a few "bad ones in the bunch." At the same time, 10 years ago if you told me priests were sexually abusing little kids all over this country I would have said no way man. Just because we have no evidence of it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened or there is no need for checks and balances.

So what your telling me is that CBP should let murders up the road or child predators and terrorists waltz right though? Tell me how letting a murderer or terrorist up the road is protecting the border? Tie CBP's hands behind their backs then hold them responsible if one of them gets through. You do know that CBP is a law enforcement agency right?
Listen, I didn't treat you like a kid and I expect the same from you. Yes, I am aware that the CBP is a law enforcement agency.

The problem I have with your suggestion is that there seems to be no rules, no oversight, let the CBP officer handle it as he wishes. That's what I have a problem with. Anytime you have absolute power there will be abuse. The cornerstone of our country is the 3 branches of government, each independent, neither having too much power and for the reason of preserving the checks and balances. If the CBP has carte blanche when it comes to searching and seizing electronic files, who watches the watcher? What stops a corrupt officer copying trade secrets or personal information and selling it off? Who oversees the private companies that are utilized for translation and decryption. Of course nobody wants murderers, sexual predators or terrorists to "waltz" through the border. I didn't suggest that. Nor did I suggest handcuffing the CBP behind their back. Stop twisting my words into something they are not. Catching sexual predators should be a secondary benefit, not the primary goal. As far as murderers, if they are wanted or have warrants, by all means, otherwise what are you looking for, a bloody knife? A typed up confession on the computer? Pictures of the crime in progress? You're going to have to rely on information from other agencies for persons of interest, warrants, etc.

And so has CBP, however, you don't like it, it's called the border search exemption, which according to SCOTUS is reasonable. CBP uses alot of the same techniques that the local agencies do, plus a few more they don't have access to,they also work with local agencies all the time, not only in enforcement operation but in the sharing of information.
So far it has been found reasonable, but the electronic files is a new and untested frontier that has yet to be challenged before the judicial branch.

Really, how does travelling twice a year qualify you to make that assumption?
Assumption is something that is accepted to be true without proof. This is not an assumption, it is a judgement based on personal experience. You don't seem to agree, which is fine, I don't dispute your statement. That is why I disclosed what the judgement was based upon.

If not being allowed to check the terrorist's or pedaphiles electronic media makes the difference whether we catch them or not then yes by not being able to check it they are waltzing right into the country.
Nobody said you are not allowed to check a terrorist. The problem is, how do you know who the terrorist is? How about working some intelligence. If you get intelligence on known suspects, operatives or associates, I don't mind it. But blindly choosing who it is that gets selected for the electronic strip search is wrong. It leaves the door open for abuse.


Removal of the border search exemption would eliminate CBP's ability to catch these criminals before they get into the country, therefore eliminating the reason for being there.
Really? Is the CBP's sole job to catch murderers and sexual predators? What about tax evaders, or is that not prestigious enough? What happened to national security, international trade laws, import tarriffs, agricultural laws, animal smuggling, drug smuggling, alien smuggling, etc.

Are you in favor of eliminating the border search exemption?
I am in favor of LIMITING the Border Search Exemption to relevant searches only. Copying a hard drive and seizing my cell phone are not relevant. It may contain proprietary information, attorney client privileged information and all kinds of other personal stuff. Even if it were relevant, there is also the problem of no standard for protection of the files, rules as to how they are examined, who examines them and what is done to protect that information. Like I said earlier, there are lots of place this information goes, lots of people get access to it and nobody seems interested in protecting it.

There is a woman whose laptop was seized at an airport and a year later it has yet to be returned. She hasn't been arrested yet. It was in the NY Times recently, I'll dig it up if you really want me to. Where is her property, physical and electronic?

Zubba
08-03-2008, 12:27 AM
Wow... they can take our PC's? Holy crap! This is the last straw!!!! I mean sure, when NSPD-51 and HSPD-20 passed "they" announced that even the constitution could be "seized", but we should really be surprised and upset about this laptop thing!!!

I hope a lot of people got the sarcasm in that.... I'd be impressed if 20% knew what either directive was.

Turbinator
08-03-2008, 6:30 AM
Guys, there are a lot of posts here and I didn't read them all, but I think we're just fueling the fear. I just got back from an overseas trip.. I've taken a handful so far in my lifetime, and I've yet to have any issues coming back into the country. I did see the quoted statement about them being able to seize your electronic media, but I've not had any problems to date. This could be a law put in place to help screen out problem people but is rarely, if ever, put into action.

Turby

lrdchivalry
08-03-2008, 10:07 AM
You are the one advocating unlimited power. You don't want rules or oversight of the electronic seizures, or at least that's what you have led me to believe. Is that not the case?

Where did I advocate unlimited power? Can CBP show up at your door at make entry without a warrant? No. Their border search exemption is limited so I don't know where your getting this idea of CBP having unlimited power.

I don't have a wide spread abuse of the Border Search Exemption. But at least we agree that there are always a few "bad ones in the bunch." At the same time, 10 years ago if you told me priests were sexually abusing little kids all over this country I would have said no way man. Just because we have no evidence of it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened or there is no need for checks and balances.

Yes there are bad ones in the bunch, however, you stilled failed to show where CBP has abused the border search exemption. I also find it interesting that you would try and equate people with criminal intent as proof of abuse of the border search authority.


Listen, I didn't treat you like a kid and I expect the same from you. Yes, I am aware that the CBP is a law enforcement agency.

Nobody is treating you like a kid. You entered this debate talking about the wrong agency not me.

The problem I have with your suggestion is that there seems to be no rules, no oversight, let the CBP officer handle it as he wishes. That's what I have a problem with. Anytime you have absolute power there will be abuse.

Show me where this abuse is taking place? Again, CBP doesn't have absolute power. Show me where CBP can operate without rules and regulations? As I have stated earlier in response to one of your posts, you have no problem with the government limiting the types of weapons an American citizen can have yet cry foul when they have the authority to search you at the border without pc. Hypocritcal in my opinion.


The cornerstone of our country is the 3 branches of government, each independent, neither having too much power and for the reason of preserving the checks and balances. If the CBP has carte blanche when it comes to searching and seizing electronic files, who watches the watcher? What stops a corrupt officer copying trade secrets or personal information and selling it off?

What is to stop the corporate officer or employee of a corporation from copying or selling those secrets? Your arguement doesn't hold water. Again you suggest CBP has unlimited authority, which is not true.

Of course nobody wants murderers, sexual predators or terrorists to "waltz" through the border. I didn't suggest that. Nor did I suggest handcuffing the CBP behind their back. Stop twisting my words into something they are not.

Actually you are suggesting that these criminals should be able to waltz into the country by stating that CBP shouldn't be able to look at peoples electronic media. I didn't twist you words, you've made it clear that CBP should not be able to look at a terrorists or child predators electronic media.

Catching sexual predators should be a secondary benefit, not the primary goal. As far as murderers, if they are wanted or have warrants, by all means, otherwise what are you looking for, a bloody knife? A typed up confession on the computer? Pictures of the crime in progress? You're going to have to rely on information from other agencies for persons of interest, warrants, etc.

This is where I feel you get lost, without the border search exemption CBP would not be able to do all those things because they would not be allowed to even stop and talk to anyone or check anyone for warrants because they would not be able to develop PC to stop them.


So far it has been found reasonable, but the electronic files is a new and untested frontier that has yet to be challenged before the judicial branch.

Actually it has.


Assumption is something that is accepted to be true without proof. This is not an assumption, it is a judgement based on personal experience. You don't seem to agree, which is fine, I don't dispute your statement. That is why I disclosed what the judgement was based upon.

If you are basing it on experience then in my opinion you do not have the experience since you only cross twice a year. I, however, see it everyday I go to work and if you want to base it on experience then I would say your still not qualified to say it doesn't happen on a regular basis.


Nobody said you are not allowed to check a terrorist. The problem is, how do you know who the terrorist is? How about working some intelligence. If you get intelligence on known suspects, operatives or associates, I don't mind it. But blindly choosing who it is that gets selected for the electronic strip search is wrong. It leaves the door open for abuse.

Tell us who the terrorists are so it would be easier for us to catch them? See, your lost again, CBP doesn't blindly select people for electronic strip searching and I am still waiting for you to show me where the abuse is taking place.



Really? Is the CBP's sole job to catch murderers and sexual predators? What about tax evaders, or is that not prestigious enough? What happened to national security, international trade laws, import tarriffs, agricultural laws, animal smuggling, drug smuggling, alien smuggling, etc.

CBP goes after all of the above, however, if they didn't have the border search exemption they would not be able to catch them.


I am in favor of LIMITING the Border Search Exemption to relevant searches only. Copying a hard drive and seizing my cell phone are not relevant. It may contain proprietary information, attorney client privileged information and all kinds of other personal stuff. Even if it were relevant, there is also the problem of no standard for protection of the files, rules as to how they are examined, who examines them and what is done to protect that information. Like I said earlier, there are lots of place this information goes, lots of people get access to it and nobody seems interested in protecting it.

The courts have already upheld that search of electronic media is considered a relevent and non intrusive search. There are rules in place in regards to chain of custody and laws/punishment for unlawful disclosure. Since your under the impression that it happens to everyone did you have your hard drive seized and copied?


There is a woman whose laptop was seized at an airport and a year later it has yet to be returned. She hasn't been arrested yet. It was in the NY Times recently, I'll dig it up if you really want me to. Where is her property, physical and electronic?

Is she still under investigation? How much of the case are you familiar with? I bet you cannot answer those questions can you? Ever seen a case take a year or more before an arrest is made? I have, however, that doesn't make it an abuse of the border search exemption.

lrdchivalry
08-03-2008, 10:14 AM
Guys, there are a lot of posts here and I didn't read them all, but I think we're just fueling the fear. I just got back from an overseas trip.. I've taken a handful so far in my lifetime, and I've yet to have any issues coming back into the country. I did see the quoted statement about them being able to seize your electronic media, but I've not had any problems to date. This could be a law put in place to help screen out problem people but is rarely, if ever, put into action.

Turby

It's not.. IMHO people jump the gun and assume everyones electronic media is being seized, copied and deciphered and it's not. When I entered the country last year not one of my 8mm video tapes or my dvd disks on my Sony handycam were touched.

Big O
08-03-2008, 11:51 AM
Where did I advocate unlimited power? Can CBP show up at your door at make entry without a warrant? No. Their border search exemption is limited so I don't know where your getting this idea of CBP having unlimited power.
The unlimited power is at the border. It ends when you leave the border. Unfortunately, you can't leave the border until released.

Yes there are bad ones in the bunch, however, you stilled failed to show where CBP has abused the border search exemption. I also find it interesting that you would try and equate people with criminal intent as proof of abuse of the border search authority.
No, I try to show you that no matter how sacred you think something or somebody is, if you leave the door open to abuse, it will happen eventually.

As I have stated earlier in response to one of your posts, you have no problem with the government limiting the types of weapons an American citizen can have yet cry foul when they have the authority to search you at the border without pc. Hypocritcal in my opinion.
I have a problem with the invasiveness of a full electronic search AND seizure. I understand that there has to be some level of search in order to enforce customs laws. But again, busting pedophiles should be a secondary benefit, not a primary concern.

What is to stop the corporate officer or employee of a corporation from copying or selling those secrets?
It's not your job to stop him, it is a matter with his employer. Not your beat.

Your arguement doesn't hold water. Again you suggest CBP has unlimited authority, which is not true.
If they can randomly choose to do whatever they please with anyone at the border, where does it stop other leaving the border which you cannot do until released. Searching and seizing all electronic data is extremely invasive and should be reserved for cases where you have probable cause to believe you're going to find something. You can get your probable cause by what the person's answers are to your usual questions, or by finding things in his luggage.

Actually you are suggesting that these criminals should be able to waltz into the country by stating that CBP shouldn't be able to look at peoples electronic media.
Once you establish that they are criminals, you may look all you want. Until then, stick to looking for fruit, meat, over the limit alcohol, illegal drugs, etc.

This is where I feel you get lost, without the border search exemption CBP would not be able to do all those things because they would not be allowed to even stop and talk to anyone or check anyone for warrants because they would not be able to develop PC to stop them.
I didn't say eliminate the Border Search Exemption. Limit the Border Search Exemption to searches like I described above.

If you are basing it on experience then in my opinion you do not have the experience since you only cross twice a year. I, however, see it everyday I go to work and if you want to base it on experience then I would say your still not qualified to say it doesn't happen on a regular basis.
For that matter, neither are you because being employed by the CBP, your view is not subjective.

Tell us who the terrorists are so it would be easier for us to catch them?
Not my job to do that, but there's plenty of watch lists and intelligence agencies whose job it is.

See, your lost again, CBP doesn't blindly select people for electronic strip searching and I am still waiting for you to show me where the abuse is taking place.
Then what are the guidelines for selecting?

You can stop waiting because I'm not going to show you where the abuse is taking place. That doesn't mean it's not taking place, nor does it mean it will not take place in the future. That's why we have checks and balances.

CBP goes after all of the above, however, if they didn't have the border search exemption they would not be able to catch them.
Who, the sexual perps? Secondary benefit, not primary concern. And again, limit the Border Search Exemption, not eliminate it. You can still talk to people, don't worry. You can even look in their luggage. You just can't read their e-mail unless you find something juicy in the luggage or their name pops up on the watch list.

There are rules in place in regards to chain of custody and laws/punishment for unlawful disclosure.
Great, why doesn't the CBP come out and say yes we can do this, but here are the rules in place to protect Mr. Taxpayer from having his identity stolen or having some bozo circulating the video he made with his wife on their honeymoon to his buddies.

lrdchivalry
08-03-2008, 12:32 PM
The unlimited power is at the border. It ends when you leave the border. Unfortunately, you can't leave the border until released.

Actually your wrong. If CBP had unlimited authority they could could do anything they wanted to you, such as use excessive force upon you, which they cannot.


No, I try to show you that no matter how sacred you think something or somebody is, if you leave the door open to abuse, it will happen eventually.

No.. You assume that because CBP has the border search exemption they will abuse it, however, you cannot cite and instance of the exemption being abused.


I have a problem with the invasiveness of a full electronic search AND seizure. I understand that there has to be some level of search in order to enforce customs laws. But again, busting pedophiles should be a secondary benefit, not a primary concern.

Again there will be no seizure of electronic media unless warranted. Catching criminals, which, include pedaphiles is a primary concern of CBP.


It's not your job to stop him, it is a matter with his employer. Not your beat.

Your right it's not my job. My job is to catch criminals and other violators crossing the border, without the border search exemption I would be unable to do it.


If they can randomly choose to do whatever they please with anyone at the border, where does it stop other leaving the border which you cannot do until released. Searching and seizing all electronic data is extremely invasive and should be reserved for cases where you have probable cause to believe you're going to find something. You can get your probable cause by what the person's answers are to your usual questions, or by finding things in his luggage.

There you go again claiming that CBP searches and seizes all electronic media, a falsehood. If CBP didn't have the border search exemption they wouldn't be able to question travellers or search their luggage.


Once you establish that they are criminals, you may look all you want. Until then, stick to looking for fruit, meat, over the limit alcohol, illegal drugs, etc.

Again without the border search exemption CBP would not be able to look for those things.


I didn't say eliminate the Border Search Exemption. Limit the Border Search Exemption to searches like I described above.

I see.. Let murderers, terrorist, and pedophiles cross the border unabated because all CBP should be looking for is fruits, meats, alcohol and illegal drugs


For that matter, neither are you because being employed by the CBP, your view is not subjective.

Actually I can. The time I have spent working with Customs/CBP gives a better perspective of what happens on the border then someone who crosses twice a year.


You can stop waiting because I'm not going to show you where the abuse is taking place. That doesn't mean it's not taking place, nor does it mean it will not take place in the future. That's why we have checks and balances.

That's because you cannot cite any sources and what could happen in the future does not make it so. I assume you own a gun, should the government put you in jail because sometime in the future you might use it unlawfully? There is no proof that you would but it could happen.


Who, the sexual perps? Secondary benefit, not primary concern. And again, limit the Border Search Exemption, not eliminate it. You can still talk to people, don't worry. You can even look in their luggage. You just can't read their e-mail unless you find something juicy in the luggage or their name pops up on the watch list.

Again without the border search exemption CBP would not even be able to look into peoples luggage let alone talk to them. Again you assume that they are reading everyones emails and viewing their electronic media. Again a fallacy.


Great, why doesn't the CBP come out and say yes we can do this, but here are the rules in place to protect Mr. Taxpayer from having his identity stolen or having some bozo circulating the video he made with his wife on their honeymoon to his buddies.

Why can't you ask them? Is the government supposed to hold your hand and guide you around?

lrdchivalry
08-04-2008, 9:25 AM
Thanks to the border search exemption 4 Lebonese terrorists were apprehended at the San Ysidro Port of Entry yesterday.

QuarterBoreGunner
08-04-2008, 9:26 AM
^link?

lrdchivalry
08-04-2008, 9:55 AM
^link?

Cannot provide a link, only that I was there when three out of the 4 were taken into custody.

Bishop
08-04-2008, 12:51 PM
And your one-time pad encryption can be broken. I guess no one here read the article on Anandtech about the supercooled quantum processors that are now in production? What do you think quantum processors are good for?

All the processing power in the world means nothing if there is nothing to solve.

For example;
I will pick a number. Any number, positive or negative, infinity to negative infinity. I will then get the sum of the first number and a second number picked the same way. My result is 3.

Now, using only my result, and all the computing power in the world, determine what my first number was. This is impossible because the number could be anything. There is no pattern. It is unbreakable.

Code breaking comes from predictability of numbers. If I obtained a truly random number though some form of generation (space radiation seems to work best), and use it to XOR against my message, the only thing you can solve for is for what you could expect from the English language (assuming I used english, and used full english words). The issue is that if your numbers are truly random, there is no solution. The encrypted text "ISQM" when solved for single predictable pattern of the english language, has the exact same probability to solve for "AR15" or "FISH" or "PUKE" or any other english four letter word.

There is nothing to solve, because every key generates different results. There is no solving for generations because every number in the key is random. There is no solving for recurrence because every number in the key is random with no repetition. There is no solving for collisions of algorithms because there is no algorithm.

You need to catch up on what's been going on in the crypto world for the past decade or so ;)

Funny you should mention "the crypto world in the past decade or so" because for the government's part, there has been NO crypto world in the past decade or so. The public used to know what was breakable and what was not. Now we do not know, because our government will not speak to its ability to break or not break encryptions (and rightly so). So, unless you are a high-level military mathematician, I don't think you could possibly have much to add to "the crypto world in the past decade or so."

Also, you seem to have neglected to mention your groundbreaking findings for deriving predictability from the incidence of cosmic rays. Such knowledge has significant scientific ramifications, so please share your wisdom.

tgun
08-05-2008, 9:19 AM
This is exactly why I do my duty to teach my friends how to use TrueCrypt (http://www.truecrypt.org/) and GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org/). Border agents can unConstitutionally copy my private data all they want, they will never find anything personal.