jump to last post 1-1 of 1 discussions (6 posts)

Social media passwords

  1. ptosis profile image77
    ptosisposted 5 months ago

    Homeland Security is forcing some travelers to provide their passwords to social media accounts as a condition to enter the U.S. This would violate the right to privacy, undermine freedom of expression, and create numerous cybersecurity risks for all travelers.

    Protect your passwords – add your name now to prevent this massive violation of our civil liberties.

    Such a social media sweep would give government officials access to communications with American friends, relatives, and colleagues. And if Homeland Security implements password collection, other countries may retaliate with similar measures against Americans.

    Imagine visiting a country – to see family or take a vacation or do business – and being forced to hand over your username and password. That country’s agents would be able to read your private messages, see everything you’ve posted or shared. What conclusions could they draw? Would they be accurate?

    Act now to prevent invasive data collection of travelers.

    Forcing travelers to give up their social media passwords is a violation of our civil liberties. It is – and that’s why we’re fighting back.

    Convince Secretary Kelly that forcing travelers to give up their social media passwords is a non-starter. Will you join us and add your name now?

    https://action.aclu.org/secure/FlyDontSpy

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      Before I would sign such a thing, I would want to know why it is being done and if it is effective - is taking a small liberty from citizens of other countries visiting the US producing results that justify even that small action?

      What does homeland security give as the reason for the action?  And what do they indicate are the results?

      1. ptosis profile image77
        ptosisposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        If don't care about  fundamental principles or established rights of the constitution then there is no debating with you.


        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          While I suppose you might be able to squirm a connection between "papers", or maybe "effects" and social media passwords, you haven't even touched on what "unreasonable" means here, that it is purely voluntary, that it does not apply to American citizens or that the place to be searched is at least semi-public.

          Now, if you would answer the questions I posed it might answer the "unreasonable" part, leaving only the other three to address.

          1. ptosis profile image77
            ptosisposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            "Bikkannavar is an American citizen, and had enrolled in the Global Entry program, which for a fee gives "low-risk travelers" expedited processing through customs, after a background check. Bikkannavar is also a NASA engineer at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Bikannavar says he "politely as I could," told the CBP officer "I wasn't allowed to give up the password." It was a work-issued phone, Bikkannavar says he told the agent, pointing out the NASA bar codes and labels on the phone." - http://www.npr.org/2017/04/11/523313829 … tering-u-s


            "A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced legislation that would require law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant before searching the digital devices of Americans trying to reenter the United States.

            The practice of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents asking for passwords to search the digital devices of Americans seeking entry into the United States has attracted significant media attention and raised concerns among privacy advocates in recent months. " - http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity … devices-at

            "According to Sophia Cope, an attorney with digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, border guards must let you into the country if you are an American citizen. This means, in theory, you can decide to say nothing about your social media activity and refuse to unlock your phone. But the flip side is the agents can detain you for so-called "secondary inspection" for hours. They also have the right to seize your phone.

            Cope says, if border agents do seize your phone, they have to return it—although that can take weeks or even months to do so in some cases. She says Americans who are really concerned about their privacy might consider deleting apps or wiping content from their device before they arrive at the border. (Though travelers with brand new phones, or ones that contain no data, might also arouse suspicion and lead to an interrogation)." - http://fortune.com/2017/02/08/social-me … book-feed/

            "how long could CBP hold you for refusing to comply?. The short answer is: your device probably will be seized, and you might be kept in physical detention—although no one seems to be sure exactly for how long." - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 … us-border/


            "New York couple Akram Shibly and Kelly McCormick returned to the U.S. from a trip to Toronto on Jan. 1, 2017, U.S. Customs & Border Protection officers held them for two hours, took their cellphones and demanded their passwords.  Three days later, they returned from another trip to Canada and were stopped again by CBP.

            "One of the officers calls out to me and says, 'Hey, give me your phone,'" recalled Shibly. "And I said, 'No, because I already went through this.'"

            The officer asked a second time.

            Within seconds, he was surrounded: one man held his legs, another squeezed his throat from behind. A third reached into his pocket, pulling out his phone. McCormick watched her boyfriend's face turn red as the officer's chokehold tightened.

            Then they asked McCormick for her phone.

            "I was not about to get tackled," she said. She handed it over.  - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 … us-border/


            “The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” ― Pat Miller, Willfully Ignorant

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/9e/74/0d/9e740d3eab5abe854c6870d22a5e9cef.jpg

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

              Now that's interesting - your link indicates that the 4th amendment does not apply to border situations.  That warrants are not necessary and even "reasonable doubt" is set aside as not required for a search.  And it doesn't matter if foreign or US citizen.

              That's scary!

 
working