Haft of the Spear

I disagree here. KP is def. not a national security issue, but even if national security is at the forefront (or should be) of our collective intel/mil/le efforts, its not the only concern.

KP or say even trade secrets are not necessarily intellectual property. KP is contraband, and as such should not be allowed inside our borders. You can effect a border search of a suitcase and find financial docs and a diary just as easily as you can search a harddrive and find the same…doesn’t mean privacy rights have been violated.

Also, probable cause is not needed for searches at the border (or its equivalent). Not to mention that I have heard of nice leads coming from KP searches (or I guess I should say hdd searches) that are national security related.

Couple of factors in play here:

- Inspector Smith stopping Mr. Jones, powering up his box and pointing-and-clicking his way through a My Pictures folder is a defense attorney’s dream case. Unless they’re following strict protocols for imaging and examining (something not addressed in the article, so can’t say yea-or-nay at this point) there are all sorts of reasons for tossing charges against Mr. Jones out the window.

- You might not need probable cause to search at the border, but what is your search criteria going to be? Every other person with a laptop (that’ll be a heck of a line)? Random? Creepy-looking-white-dudes-fresh-from-Bangkok? A terrorist could look like anyone but by and large they don’t look like Ed Grimly; who knows that a KP holder looks like?

- Where is the line drawn? Do you get the business if they don’t find KP but a stash of your “adult entertainment?” Does your day get ruined because you like the male/female form but your Customs inspector lets his religious beliefs to interfere with his professional judgment?

- So they search your laptop and you come up clean, what they didn’t search is your iPod, which contains gigs of KP, or your phone, or PDA …

I’m not sure I understand the issue I guess. If an inspector targets someone (CBP is pretty good at targeting, at least from what I’ve found) coming from say…Thailand, they have electronic media and for whatever reason (only say it that way because I wouldn’t go into specifics online, the little of them I do know) I believe the inspector only needs to have a reasonable suspicion to search the media (like the article says, I know they need it for more invasive searches, and need sup. approval for body/person searches). They find KP on a laptop (happens every day) and then would usually refer the incident to OI, or ICE OI rather. Of course its then just like any other KP case, but not sure how a defense attorney could make a good challenge to a legal border search. This stuff happens every day and media is seized, people are charged and locked up.

CBP definitely has search protocols in place and are trained to search digital media.

ID’ng KP is a different matter. A lot of it is known and if in digital form can be tracked via hash id…newer stuff I’m pretty sure is determined first by the inspector/agent and confirmed by medical folks. Adult entertainment is a bit of a red herring…I’ve never worked with anyone who gave a crap if someone had regular porn on their computer or in their house…in fact, that’s usually the joke, who will find the porn stash during a search warrant.

iPods, phones, PDAs get searched…hell, in training they even talk of seizing printers to have any onboard memory searched.

The judge with the differing opinion in the article seems way off. Media is not an extension of our brain. It is merely a storage device, like a file cabinet or briefcase. You have REP within that space, but REP is different at the border.

There is no coverage in the report of the protocols in place to ensure forensic soundness of the initial search, chain of custody, etc., etc. As reported it sounds like the inspector is pointing-and-clicking his way on the device, which is basically tampering with evidence. Similar report from a year or two ago was just that: “Can I look at your computer? Sure. [power up, click to My Documents-My Pictures]. Nothing here – welcome home. Thanks!”

Assuming procedures are not sound at the screening point, then confidence remains low that they’ve got the latest hashkeeper files on hand to sort the real KP from the 25-year-olds made-up to be KP (I’m feeling dirty just typing this). Extend this to having people with the wherewithal to recognize the value in anything on the subject’s person with digital memory. You and I do this in our sleep; you think a guy whose job is 99% non-forensics is on the ball?

Caveats apply: If major screening centers have a CF cell in the back office, now we’re singing a different tune.

The judge is shifting with the times. Media is storage, but storage of what? Just numbers? Your intellectual property? Your discussions with your lawyer? For a growing number it is an extension of human memory and fishing expeditions through anyone’s mind is very uncool to me.

I see the article missing info on CBP’s inspection process as more of a lack of research on the authors part than anything. The fact is they do have a process, though I’m not sure they’d share it with the general public.

I take it you’re lucky enough to have never worked CP/KP…its quite apparent when something is or isn’t, and not a ton of time is wasted on the stuff that “may” be CP/KP (in my experience).

The issue of media storage is really interesting the more I think of it. Yes, you can keep your thoughts and IP stored on a HDD, but you can just as well keep it in a journal…which have been searched at border as well (though I don’t know if any cases stemming from those searches have been contested in the same way). In my mind digital media is not an extension of your memory, like I said before its just like having a file cabinet or briefcase. If you keep a journal of your discussions with your lawyer in your briefcase it could be viewed during a legal border search. That doesn’t mean the inspector is going to have the context to somehow gain some knowledge they shouldn’t have. After all, they do have procedures, and specific items they are looking for (for the most part).