Welcome back to the United States. Now let's see what's on your laptop

Authorities need a search warrant to get at a computer in your home, and reasonable suspicion that you're up to no good to search your laptop in other places (like if you're surfing bomb-making sites while using WiFi at a coffee shop).

But the rules change when you're crossing the border back into the United States. And that has raised concerns from business travelers, privacy advocates and some lawmakers about the vulnerability of the huge amounts of information people carry on their laptops and other digital devices.

The legality of the practice hinges around whether searching a laptop is the equivalent of looking in your luggage, or more like a strip search.

U.S. Courts have ruled, as recently as this spring in a case stemming from a search at LAX, that there's no need for warrants or suspicions when a person is seeking to enter the country because any "routine search" is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. In effect, it's like luggage: anything and everything in your laptop, cellphone, BlackBerry or digital camera can be examined and copied by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents.

So far, the agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security, has been vague about when and why it conducts those digital searches, how long it keeps the information and what is done with it.  Sen. Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, wants to change that. At a congressional hearing he chaired on the issue today, he said:

"I guarantee you this: Neither the drafters of the Fourth Amendment, nor the Supreme Court when it crafted the 'border search exception,' ever dreamed that tens of thousands of Americans would cross the border every day, carrying with them the equivalent of a full library of their most personal information.... Customs agents must have the ability to conduct even highly intrusive searches when there is reason to suspect criminal or terrorist activity, but suspicion-less searches of Americans' laptops and similar devices go too far. Congress should not allow this gross violation of privacy."

Two leading privacy advocates at the hearing -- Lee Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Peter Swire of the Center for American Progress -- agreed with Feingold that the searching of laptops and other devices violates people's privacy. The EFF also has filed suit to get more information about the program.

Have you had your electronic equipment searched or seized at the border? We'd love to hear your story in the comments below.

The issue is a particular concern for businesses, which ...

... risk the loss of proprietary data when executives travel abroad, said Susan K. Gurley, executive director of the Assn. of Corporate Travel Executives.

After the California ruling this spring, the group warned its members and business travelers to limit the business and personal information they carry on laptops taken out of the country. Of the 100 people who responded to a survey the association did on the issue in February, 7% said they had been subject to the seizure of a laptop or other electronic device.

For lawmakers, it's not an easy issue. Feingold is considering legislation to prohibit "suspicionless searches" of electronic devices. But Sen. Sam Brownback, a Republican from Kansas, noted that the terrorist threat meant U.S. officials had to balance individual rights with protecting the nation.

"Terrorists take advantage of this kind of technology," he said. "As a legal matter, it seems clear to me that government officials do have a right under the constitution to search laptop computers and similar devices without probable cause or reasonable suspicion at the border."

As for whether rifling through the contents of devices is more like a luggage check or a strip search, legal scholars at the hearing were split. The courts have found that routinely examining people's possessions at the border is legal, but have ruled that there needs to be a higher standard for more invasive searches. So as people store more and more information on portable devices, lawmakers are starting to wrestle with when and how the government should be able to peek at that data.

-- Jim Puzzanghera

Puzzanghera, a Times staff writer, covers tech and media policy from Washington, D.C.

Photo: A Transportation Security Administration screener at Baltimore-Washington International Airport. Credit: Paul J. Richards / AFP/Getty Images

Comments

[writerdjb]

No, but I’ve had my underwear searched, my trunk opened. Asked why I was in a rent a car. Had the seats pulled out before 911. Then again I was pulled out of the airport line too. Post 911 Asked if I was banned from Canada etc. This is why I haven't been to Canada in two years. Sometimes its tough going some times coming back. And Canada now wonders why Americans do not cross the border

http://tinyurl.com/5jecph

So apply that to Mexico. So if I attend the Toronto Film Festival this year. I will be taking hand notes. No lap top for me. And to quote a law prof. the 4th Amendment died along time ago.

[Carolyn]

It is foolish, in my opinion, to travel with a laptop or other digital media, that contains any sensitive business information. Forget about Customs getting your stuff. It's far more likely that your laptop will be stolen from your hotel room, from your backpack, from a coffee house or from a business conference room.

In my company, people travel only with the bare minimum of applications software on their laptops, then access company information through a VPN. If you do not have a VPN, then I'd suggest documents be stored in a secure online storage system and accessed as needed. After you've worked on them, then upload them back to the secure online storage system and delete/shred them from your laptop.

[Chris]

I honestly think your country has gone collectively insane. Americans are programmed from birth to say "at least we're free", "at least we're free", like some kind of sick mantra. But, when you compare your freedoms to those of other advanced nations, you come up far short (with exception of unlimited free speech, including hate speech). You can be searched almost at will, your data copied at the borders, arrested for a bad check, arrested for taking a picture of train tracks, arrested for speeding, are not allowed to go to Cuba and other countries, the list goes on and on. And that's how you treat your fellow citizens; the rest of the world has no rights at all, or so it appears with your treatment of so-called enemy combatants, etc.

[A.G.]

I frequently cross between Tijuana and San Diego. On one occasion a border officer saw that I had a digital camera and asked what I had been taking pictures of. I said I was at my grandmothers birthday party and had taken hundreds of pictures while there. He asked to see the camera and I asked why. He said it was "standard procedure." I reluctantly gave him the camera and he browsed through all the pictures. No joke. The next day I wrote a letter condemning this "procedure" and took it down to my Congressman Bob Filner's office. I have yet to hear back from him on this issue.

[Douglas eisenstark]

Will those little slips of customs papers now ask if you are carrying fruits, vegetables or computer viruses?
Douglas Eisenstark L.Ac.

[Brett McKenzie]

Like identity theft isn't already a huge problem

[Arye Michael Bender]

Wasn't the search process justified because they were looking for weapons or bombs? Well, in our police state words have finally become weapons to the powers that be.

Fear has trumped freedom. And it happened so easily.

[JD]

This just seems totally outrageous. Apparently, the terrorists of 9/11 used box cutters to hold the planes captive, which under ordinary searches before heightened security should have been rejected on the flights anyway right? Instead of just making sure competent security is in place, now we have to go through the inconvenient unsanitary intrusiveness of taking off our shoes (couldn't that detector we go through know if there's a bomb on a shoe?). Now they're talking about copying all the info on our laptops? I have an electronic diary on there sharing my most private thoughts, hopes and fears. Does that mean some government bureaucrat would have to read that to ensure I'm not plotting some attack? It's ridiculous. What If I carry a personal diary book on the plane? Would they need to scan and copy all of those paper pages too? The government is just perversely intrusive and curious if it comes to that. Outrageous idea!

[Dave Mora]

Time to start learning how to use Crypto programs.

[RAD]

The searches by customs are completely amateurish - just some dude poking around your laptop. What I've done on OS X to protect my information is:

1. Set my home directory to be encrytped, using FileVault.
2. Use PGP to set up a couple encrypted virtual drives where I keep all of my work (one drive is 'personal' and the other drive 'work')
3. Create a second user that doesn't require a login.

When customs asks to see my laptop I let them log in as the second user I created. This user doesn't have access to my encyrpted information, but there's enough information on the drive for the agent to feel happy. (for example, my pictures, music, etc is in my Shared user and so not encrypted and therefore accessible)

Even if they seize my laptop it would take them several years to decrypt my information and by then my business info (source code, database info, customer info, etc) will be worthless.

You really don't want to give your data to customs - you have no idea where this info ends up, and could very well be sold to your competitors.

[Joshua Steen]

It's completely foolish to suggest that people who travel with digital media are foolish. This is a digital world, and many people make their living with their digital tools. People whose profession it is to use digital mediums, (such as photographers, journalists, and writers) as well as all the rest of us should have our private and intellectual property protected. How long will it be once customs personnel start copy our information before THEY start selling photos and other ideas and things to the trash media, or for instance copy a manuscript someone has been working on and attempt to publish it as their own work? I have no issue with searches based on reasonable suspicion or evidence, and warrants of course, but to have my private thoughts; images and life recorded and scrutinized at a whim is completely unacceptable. Here's some food for thought, while I was stationed overseas and going through a divorce, I communicated with my attorney almost exclusively via email, and digital documents. Is that not privileged attorney client information? Even IF I was IN prison, conversations between me and my attorney are private.

[Jack Ryan]

What if I'm writing a novel, and it is stored on my laptop? And what if half the characters are terrorists? And what if I create a new scheme for blowing up buildings, like crashing a plane into the U.S. Congress. Can I be arrested for promoting terrorism?

[JS]

As a frequent overseas traveler, it's good to know what they're up to. I will now be sure to take appropriate steps to safeguard my files, information, pictures etc....catch me if you can.

[ll]

It's really amazing how 9/11 has chiseled away at our freedoms and it's not by the "terrorists who don't really exist, a bunch of B/S" but from our own government.

Where is the ACLU???

The USA is still the best country in the world, but I'm afraid and saddened that we will become like the rest of the mediocre countries out there.

By the way Chris not all speech is protected in the US, e.g. "fighting words" are not. You can't police hate speech and you shouldn't be able to, hate speech is subjective as is most speech. Look at France and Bridget Bardot, look what they did to her for expressing her thoughts. Very Unfortunate. Who knows, limiting speech may be right around the corner after this idiotic decision.

[laura]

Well written Josh. I was thinking the same thing. What if these fools delete your writing material....I'm a writer; I would feel so violated if someone read my stuff until I was actually ready for someone else to read it. And totally IP rights--intrinsically this is just so wrong.

[gch0105]

in my world (where the constitution remains intact), routine stops are supposed to be like dui checkpoints, where the government does a quick non-invasive search--not thorough searches that delve through your belongings...but thanks to conservative justices built along the rehnquist, thomas, scalia, alito, roberts bent, the constitution no longer serves to limit government's intrusion into innocent people's lives...the republican party has abandoned true conservatism as it embraces an a centrist government controlled by a single man...neocons want nothing more than a police state in which their party rules and tells the people what they can and cannot do...essentially, they want germany circa 1938 with a strong leader that controls an all-powerful party.

[laura]

GCH,

Don't think the liberals don't want the same thing. Neocons are liberals. The policies are the same. The conservatives are gone.

It's sad.

[fred]

Wanna know how to end all this nonsense? Vote.

[laura]

Right Fred and who are we to vote for--McCain, Obama, Clinton yeah that will change things.....I don't think so.

It would have to be an overhaul of the entire media in order for a real, serious candidate to win...

[JaelleG]

I am German, and I used not to be obsessed with privacy. I wouldn't have any objections to searches, I wouldn't object to even open my laptop and let them browse through the contents (under my supervision, because I don't want them to delete something), and most data isn't so sensitive that it can be viewed and remembered by a customs official, then used against me or my company. Copying though is theft. Plain and clear. If I carried a book or a CD they wouldn't copy that either, would they? Because that would be piracy.

I think the American military is using 9/11 as a welcome excuse to gain more power and to slowly eliminate human rights from their and other countries' citizens. No, I am not exaggerating. Honecker built the wall because he wanted to safeguard his people from the evil influences of the west. Hitler attacked Poland because they were a threat to his country. Outside threats have always been a welcome excuse for gagging inside opposition.

Apart from that, how long should I calculate to wait at the border if they want to copy my 120 GB hard disc? I need my laptop. And I have to go to the US because my boss says I have to. It'll be the only time, though, and I go under protest.

I hear some European countries are contemplating to handle American travelers just the same. You'll have three booths then, one saying "EU" where you just walk through, one saying "Others" where your passport gets checked, and maybe your luggage if you are suspicious. And one where it says "US", where they take fingerprints, photos, there is only one customs official there, luggage is opened, and each and every laptop and mobile phone copied to a server while the others wait in line. If enough countries pulled that through, the US citizens would very soon make sure the rules changed in their country. Because frankly, nobody else can.

[JTurn]

Why are people so worried about things like this, but not so much about REAL ID's? All of your personal information will be on ONE little card! Except for the States that have said... NO! (Example: Arizona)

Homeland Security is a joke, no one "Office" should have that much control over so many things, Hitler would have been proud!

It's simple, nowadays if you don't "fight" anything they push forward, then it's only going to get worse, the people can get anything they want, they just have to come together and demand it as a whole!

[X. B.]

Recently I was stopped at the US border as I was travelling on short notice to take care of my girlfriend of six years after she had emergency surgery. I have crossed the border many times in the past six years, but that was the first time I've ever been so thoroughly searched.

The border agents went through my car (front, back, and trunk), my luggage, my wallet, my digital camera ("Why don't you have any pictures on here?" they asked suspiciously. Why would I leave home with a camera already full of pictures?), and, yes, my laptop. They even took it into a back room at one point, but they forgot to close the door all the way and I could see what they were doing, which wasn't much, just clicking around normally, checking my video folder and trash bin. After my laptop was returned to me, I was fingerprinted and had my photo taken, which is the ultimate paranoid cliche, really: the American government now has a file on me. If it weren't for the fact that my girlfriend was lying in a hospital bed 350 miles away, I would have turned around and gone home right then and there.

This went on for over two hours with no explanation, but finally, after nothing turned up, they said... that they suspected me of attempting to enter the US as an illegal immigrant, and I had to go home. My jaw just about hit the floor, and I let them know (wording my response VERY CAREFULLY) that I was a Canadian, living in Canada, HAPPY in Canada, with ZERO intention of moving to the USA. It was such a bizarre and unexpected accusation that it must have shown on my face, because they relented and agreed to give me a three-week "controlled entry" into the United States, with the dire warning that I had to present myself at that same border crossing by deadline or I would be banned from the country.

The whole situation was UN REAL, and I will never return to the United States for pleasure until these security issues are sorted out. I do believe things will get better someday (America has seen worse abuses and recovered), but, as seen from the above article, it won't be any time soon. And by the way, whenever the authorities claim these are anti-terrorism measures, citizens need to call them on it. These laws have not resulted in a single terrorist arrest, EVER. Their ONLY purpose is to find child pornography, keep out illegal immigrants, and win votes for the political opportunists who dream them up. Period.

[Purgle]

The part about looking through digital camera photos is mind-boggling. A. a memory card wouldn't be a bad place to put a contraband file, because unless it's a JPEG it would be invisible to the camera slide show. so snooping through the pictures is useless, B. so you took pictures of Area 51? Most cameras can hide pictures. Or swap cards. Our enemies, whether criminal or political, have one thing in their favor - that they're only up against the police.

Another thing - if this Administration had the courage of their convictions, they'd insist that passengers embark with some means of protecting themselves, like the heroic passengers of Flight 93 did. At least, don't confiscate our nail clippers and Swiss Army knives; bag and tag them, give them to the Purser to put in a lock-box, and return them to us as we disembark. How hard is that to do?

[gch0105]

laura,

the difference between neocons and liberals is that liberals want the government to be responsive to the people, whereas neocons want the people to be responsive to the government...the party of lincoln is no longer interested in "a government of the people, by the people, and for the people". somehow the mantle of that legacy has now been picked up by the deomcrats--the party that was founded in opposition to a centralized government. the democrats are the only ones that now are looking to protect the people's rights against unconstitutional government encroachment.

[Chris]

We are all criminals even without a record!