^Sure, but presumably those procedures would be governed by executive orders. If CBP did violate some executive order, it would be interesting to know which one.
^^ probably the story either has a lot more to it or is bogus.
That’s a well-sourced and convincing comment…
If you know the CBP violated an EO, you should be able to at least name which one you thought was violated. Otherwise, it’s just uninformed speculation.
@roethlisburger – in general, statutes are not interpreted or enforced through executive orders. That is, EO’s are the exception rather than the rule. I’d suggest that you familiarize yourself with the federal regulatory process before posting, so as not to embarrass yourself further.
If you think a statute was violated, what was it? Also, your tone is unduly snarky.
I didn’t offer an opinion at all as to whether a statute was violated. I was responding to your post #20 (“presumably those procedures would be governed by executive orders”) Agency actions are not generally governed by executive orders; they are governed by regulations.
If his phone contained any sensitive data, he took a huge security risk by carrying it with him overseas on a personal trip, where it might have been subject to search by foreign customs. Absent some official statement from NASA, I think we’re getting a distorted view of the incident.
Of possible relevance:
http://boingboing.net/2017/02/12/how-to-cross-a-us-or-other-b.html
I have to wonder if there is any limit to airport searches under the Fourth Amendment. Will the courts really say (or have they said) that the government has the right to search a citizen’s phone without any suspicion of wrongdoing? It must not have happened enough yet for it to be fully litigated, it seems to me.
There are some court decisions referenced from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception that may be relevant to the question in #29.
Thanks, that’s interesting. As I surmised, it hasn’t been fully litigated. The most recent appeals court decision in that article, from the Ninth Circuit, says there must be reasonable suspicion, which I agree with.
I guess a lot of people are wondering now. Interesting idea to get a burner phone and discard it before boarding. But what would happen if Customs wanted to see your phone and you didn’t have one?
Couldn’t one say they just don’t have one. Especially considering it’s true at that point in time?
In the government, possible compromises of sensitive data are considered non-public, sensitive information. So if you believe Bikkannavar’s phone contained sensitive information and CBP may have done anything unlawful to compromise the security of the data, Bikkannavar was almost certainly in violation of the non-disclosure agreements he signed, when posting about the event on Facebook.
Most non-disclosure agreements* I’ve signed or saw as part of my employment aren’t drawn so overbroadly to include the mere mention of having one’s device with critical corporation/federal government data compromised unless he was working in a highly unusual top secret military/intelligence related project. It doesn’t sound like he was based on that report.
In most cases, he’d only be in a violation if the post about the event included the actual NASA proprietary data within the device CBP insisted on accessing. Unless you can find where the report stated he did so, there’s no evidence from the report he did so.
- This included doing so merely to visit an older cousin who worked at a technology firm which works on highly-classified projects for the military/Federal govt. Agreement means I can't disclose what I saw inside or anything happening inside with other employees or pertaining to the projects being worked on. It doesn't bar me from mentioning that I paid a visit to such a facility....especially if I leave out the name of the firm or the location.
I once went to a sneak preview of a (really bad) movie where they made us leave our phones outside the theater so that no one recorded it. This was just outside of DC and I overheard people having fits, mainly because they were federal employees and weren’t allowed to leave their phones anywhere. The movie people told them they could just leave the battery behind but really it’s so simple in that case - just say no to the free, bad movie!
Don’t you work in a financial firm? If so, the relevance of the NDAs you’ve signed to the ones used at NASA is zero. I can assure you the federal government does have NDAs that overly broad. In addition to the NDAs, he would have undergone security training with additional, more specific requirements. Besides the security issues, some agencies like to manage everything external to the government, by having it go through public affairs. Assuming this wasn’t a hoax, posting like he did was a violation of NASA policy. I’m not sure what the point is about your cousin and highly classified projects. If he exposed you to classified information when you didn’t have a clearance, he belongs in prison.
The point was that I had to sign a Federal NDA agreement just to even step onto the non-classified parts of my cousin’s workplace in order to visit him there after getting permission from the firm’s management and passing a Federal background check.
And no, he didn’t disclose any classified info, but the NDA was written to state I can’t disclose anything I may see just as a legalistic CYA.
I find it interesting you’re demonstrated inclination is to be predisposed to believing those in authority over those allegedly victimized by them and assuming they or my cousin must have done something wrong. Find that mentality very interesting…
I’ve worked on a lot of government contracts, so I have a good sense of how they operate in some areas. What sounds like a company specific trade secrets agreement or maybe a CYA agreement, covering inadvertent disclosures, for a social visit isn’t the same read in given to the employees. Even under the terms of whatever you signed, I bet there’s a big difference between saying I visited an unnamed company at an unnamed location vs senior engineer Smith’s phone at Company X was hacked.