How dare the former Mozilla boss and current Apple boss speak against the government and those policies? Obviously the gov't is righteous and never would do anything immoral or even illegal. Your electronicly stored papers and effects are searchable by the gov't anytime a puny citizen dares to speak out against the ruling party's agenda and every punk citizen will be persecuted , correction, prosecuted for even challenging the gov't's demand for those papers and effects.
Free speech is only free if the ruling party says that you are allowed to speak and only what they tell you what to say. And Don't You forget it, puny citizens.
All I wanted to do was give a "clap" to the article (and others I've read) but AFAICT there's literally no other way to sign up for a medium account without using google or facebook.
And I know exactly why: "To make Medium work, we log user data and share it with service providers."
Gal is the former CTO of Mozilla and was questioned about his work with Mozilla, but that's a pretty thin thread back to Firefox.
Probably more relevant at /r/mozilla (and OP did post it there), but that sub is pretty quiet.
I've said this before, but anything related to Mozilla and their mission is fine to post to r/Firefox.
In this case, this shows that someone was targeted by US customs for being seen as related to Mozilla and Mozilla's activism. Government's harassing Mozilla activists is pretty significant.
Yeah well that's bullshit. Gal hasn't been associated with Mozilla for years and this has nothing to do with "Mozilla's activism" but is just another excuse to inject pure politics out there. It's that simple.
And I'm not the only person here who feels that way.
It's a rubber band being stretched as far as being linked to Firefox is concerned and really has noting to do with our topic here. The guy doesn't even work for Mozilla anymore. I don't think it belongs here.
The fact that this guy refused to do anything they asked without an attorney and was just simply let go WITH his devices speaks volumes about the efficacy of CBP. They either had the wrong guy (if they were indeed looking for someone specific) or had the right guy but knew he wasn't actually a threat and just wanted to be an asshole to him. What a shit show.
The world is definitely moving in the wrong direction.
I had this happen to me a few times recently as well. Once, trying to *leave* Israel, I refused to unlock my laptop and they confiscated it and sent it on the next flight two days later. Another time, trying to *enter* Turkey, I refused to unlock both my phone and laptop, so they asked me to leave the country (further complicated by the fact that they had already stamped my passport and I had arrived by bus, so they had to scratch out my arrival stamp and made me walk back across the border). I'm lucky that it was only inconvenient in both of these instances. For many people it's much worse (stuck in the cold, violent, robbed, jailed, etc).
Dunno what to do about this. I think TSA is a sham and a waste of my money. I think border control is taking my money and using it to abuse people. I don't think it's ok that I can pay to avoid the poor people line at the airport.
I've written my reps and the president, I call about once a month, but it has no measurable effect. Smarter people than me have done audits on TSA and published them in famous newspapers to show how useless they are. There's people fighting against CBP locking up asylum seekers but it still happens.
Dunno what to do. Partner and I are considering abandoning the USA.
Although it is difficult to do so, maintaining your calm when faced by intimidation by government agents generally works out. Andreas did exactly the right thing - followed his gut calmly then, filed a case in the courts later.
Every time an article like this pops up (seems like a couple times a month now), I'm validated in my decision to donate monthly to the ACLU. They're always mentioned as fighting this stuff on the front lines.
It's horrible but the case-law seems fairly well settled; various courts have ruled that lots of searches that would otherwise violate the 4th Amendment are totally permissible for CBP agents within 100 miles of the border and at customs checkpoints within international airports. I'd love to be surprised if there is a legitimate case here.
Glen Greenwald started writing about this back in 2012.
>One of the more extreme government abuses of the post-9/11 era targets U.S. citizens re-entering their own country, and it has received far too little attention. With no oversight or legal framework whatsoever, the Department of Homeland Security routinely singles out individuals who are suspected of no crimes, detains them and questions them at the airport, often for hours, when they return to the U.S. after an international trip, and then copies and even seizes their electronic devices (laptops, cameras, cellphones) and other papers (notebooks, journals, credit card receipts), forever storing their contents in government files. No search warrant is needed for any of this. No oversight exists. And there are no apparent constraints on what the U.S. Government can do with regard to whom it decides to target or why.
Laura Poitras, the documentary filmmaker whose story was told in the above link faced several dozen of these incidents between the Bush and the Obama years.
Interestingly, Edward Snowden learned who Poitras was from this series of stories, and Poitras' experiences with repeated searches and seizures led to her learning enough about encryption so that when Snowden decided to contact the press and become a whistleblower, Poitras was the first journalist he attempted to contact who knew enough to be able to exchange encryption keys and communicate with him directly.
They informed me that I had no right to speak to an attorney at the border despite being a U.S. citizen, and threatened me that failure to immediately comply with their demand is a violation of federal criminal code 18 USC 111.
You're not alone. I've cut my U.S. travel significantly in the last years due to what I've experienced as hostile border agents for reasons I could never quite figure out but probably related to my nomadic lifestyle. I'm not a U.S. citizen but I do come from a "friendly" nation and it's shameful some of the things that have been said to me in an effort to catch me out in a lie that didn't exist.
> The agents proceeded to search my belongings and demanded that I unlock my smartphone and laptop. This was rather concerning for me. My phone and laptop are property of my employer and contain unreleased software and proprietary information. I’ve signed a non-disclosure agreement promising not to give anyone access.
His employer is Apple. I was always worried about this same scenario when traveling with an Apple-owned laptop..
Fantastic that he posted his experience, but it sounded like a pretty standard experience with authorities for many Americans. Genuinely curious why this is news compared to what happens to many other people?
Going on a trip in the short term and just got a phone with facial recognition unlock. I think it's important to turn this feature off before returning to the US as it could easily be misused in this exact situation.
This needs to be challenged to the Supreme Court level whereby it is deemed unconstitutional for TSA agents to detain and seize people and their possessions without actual demonstrable cause relating to national security and/or the spirit of the law(s) governing their policies and procedure.
If overly broad legislation is being abused against the spirit and intention of it, then the court needs to step in to legally to rule that this cannot be done, so long as such finding is in line with the constitution.
Border responses are little different to the support the average person gets from a tech giant. You get the response you get and that’s it. You need deep pockets, serious friends or an online furore or you have no choice but to remain oblivious. As with the tech giants, for the decent people caught up by mistake, it’s frustrating and terrifying.
CBP/TSA/DHS are thugs who have virtually unlimited power, zero accountability, and relish the chance to abuse their power. Its no different from cops celebrating killing innocent people.
The US media is a joke, they drump up fear without holding anyone in govt accountable, and the people are stupid, no one cares about this kind of thing, they'd rather believe the usual nonsense about 'keeping us safe'.
It's analogous to police "searching" a homeless person by throwing, tearing up and destroying all of their property without even reasonable suspicion... they do it and get away with murdering people time-after-time because they can under a thinly-duplicitous cover of qualified immunity (at least in the US).
Although police at the borders don't have to have any reasonable suspicion for searches, racial profiling, secret watch lists and targeted intimidation are a likely consequent of an unfettered military-industrial complex that long since ceased to do more than security theater and carry water for the corporate elites. So it should come with zero surprise that such an empire's law enforcement acts with impunity however it pleases and only ensures to "serve and protect" the rich elites' and their property, effectively creating a socioeconomic apartheid of gated communities and post-apocalyptic anarchist favelas, both in terms of geography and public discrimination, that tears a society apart into a failed, third-world, backwards country.
This is becoming too common. Laura Poitras has documented her harassment as have multiple others activists and journalists. The idea of opaque no fly and other secret lists, secret processes and demanding to go through people's personal papers is totalitarian.
If this happened in China or for instance Venezuela there is instant global outrage about 'freedom' and yet every time the exact same thing happens in the UK or the US the outrage is quickly replaced by legalese and apologism. Surely if people cared so much about any of these values they would severely push back when it happens in their own backyard but we rarely see that, just more demonizing others which quickly loses meaning and becomes complicit in the descent to a quasi police state.
Many who make sweeping statement about 'democracy' and 'freedom' seem to be severely disconnected from things on the ground as those those who use these 'freedoms' in any serious way in terms of actual activism or critical journalism however slight end up on some kind of list and singled out for harassment. 
He's saying he was targeted because he's known to disapprove of the Trump administration? Please. If anything, it was considerably worse prior to 2016.
A better question would be why someone technically knowledgeable would be carrying a laptop through airline security at all. As soon as it's out of your hands, you have to assume it's been blown, security-wise. Far better to just buy a burner Chromebook at your destination.