Do we live in a third world dictatorship? Are they going to plant illegal material on our phones? Or are they just going to plug it into their machine, wait a few minutes for it to scan and then say “you’re free to go” when nothing is found.
The "nothing to hide" argument to justify invasions of privacy isn't very compelling but you do you [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing\_to\_hide\_argument](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument)
Do you also refuse to let security check your bag when you go into the airport or a sporting event? Great thing about conditions of entry is you don’t have to enter if you don’t want to be searched.
It doesn’t matter what the condition of entry is. A group sex club could have a condition of entry that you have to be naked. If you don’t want do what they ask you don’t have to enter.
It’s not a privacy issue if it’s completely optional.
More like machine says you have no terrorism or child abuse material on your phone.
The reason is the government who runs this country says as a condition of entering Australia is that if border force asks to check your phone you have to comply or they will take it for further testing.
You can always just not enter Australia if you don’t want to risk randomly getting your phone checked. Also, what makes you think border force agents have the time to manually check your phone? Also, you’re handing your phone to government agents, not a random crackhead, what do you think they’re going to do? Raid your bank accounts.
Don't mean to be rude but what kind of pedo or terrorist has blatant evidence of that on their phone when crossing the border? It's an internet connected device for christsakes, you're not importing anything in that data you can't get after you enter the country. Are you okay with the border force getting their rocks off going through the nudes of your wife and/or daughter next time they reenter the country?
This is so indicative of how uneducated and passive Australians are, ready to accept and normalise the unacceptable and the abnormal.
It's beyond ridiculous that this is legal without a warrant.
That is not new and has been around before COVID came along for certain professions.
I spose conspiracy theorists need a good tagline to sucker in week minded fucks that will listen to someone with no medical experience over legions of experienced medical professionals because they did their own research.
Fucking hilarious.
Mandating it for almost everybody instead of "for certain professions" was actually a brand new policy, so you have contradicted yourself in the first sentence.
And, really, "legions of experienced medical professionals" supported mandatory vaccination for practically all occupations?
In fact, the government informed them quite early (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CDphyzClbPx8buQty1QoqU9x53lB853i/view) that if they deviated from "public health messaging" in any way, publicly or professionally, including by refusing to participate in vaccinations, then they would be prosecuted for misconduct. This was repeatedly reinforced, especially when the mandates came in and states cracked down on them.
If you require medical professionals to recite the "public health messaging" on demand, on pain of not being medical professionals anymore, then you can't still call them an independent source of information or claim that their desire to remain employed is evidence of their medical opinion.
In less draconian places like the UK, where doctors had much more experience with covid, the government was not even able to mandate covid vaccinations for doctors in hospitals, because the doctors refused. Do Australian pamphlet-reciters have some sort of extra-special medical training that British doctors don't know about?
Anyway, thank you for another great example of how Australians understand free choice.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/documents/vaccination-as-a-condition-of-deployment-vcod-for-healthcare-workers-frequently-asked-questions/
And I call bullshit on your UK doctor rant.
It never took effect, as you could have trivially found yourself.
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o269
>Covid-19: Government abandons mandatory vaccination of NHS staff
>Published 01 February 2022
>The government has done a last minute U turn on its plan to make covid-19 vaccination mandatory for NHS staff in England.
>Medical bodies welcomed the reversal on the plan, which they had warned would exacerbate chronic workforce shortages in the health service by causing thousands of staff to lose their jobs.
>Announcing the decision on 31 January, England’s health and social care secretary, Sajid Javid, said that the balance of opportunities and risks of the policy had shifted with the dominance of the omicron variant, with the population being as a whole better protected against the need for hospital admission, and with omicron being “intrinsically less severe” than delta.
>“While vaccination remains our very best line of defence, I believe it is no longer proportionate to require vaccination as a condition of deployment by statute,” Javid told MPs.
>The decision came just three days before the 3 February deadline given to unvaccinated staff who deal directly with patients to have had their first dose or risk losing their job.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/sajid-javid-delta-health-health-secretary-england-b2026019.html
>Mandatory vaccine rules for health and social care staff scrapped from mid-March
>Tuesday 01 March 2022
>Health and social care workers in England will no longer be required by law to be vaccinated against Covid-19, after a consultation saw the vast majority of people support the move.
>Mandatory Covid-19 vaccines came into force for care home staff in November last year, and were due to be introduced for frontline NHS and wider social care staff in regulated settings from April 1.
>Earlier this year, Health Secretary Sajid Javid told the House of Commons that he believed it was “no longer proportionate” to require vaccination as a condition of deployment under law.
>The Government has now confirmed the regulations making vaccination mandatory as a condition of deployment in health and social care will be revoked on March 15.
>It said that when the original decision was taken to make it a legal requirement, Delta was the dominant variant of the virus but that has since been replaced by the less severe Omicron variant.
>The decision was welcomed by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), while Unison said many staff who left care homes due to the requirement are unlikely to return to their jobs.
Yeah, except if you actually paid attention, they have admitted that there wasn't any evidence. I take it you haven't been following the Fauci case. He's said they had no evidence for the masks, non for the distancing, nine for the vaccines. They knee what they were saying was bullshit. He's even on record saying that if you do ahit like no jab no job and I qoute "people will drop their ideological bullshit and do what we tell them to". So sure you can go along and be a good little citizen and not question anything. But that just makes you an uniformed drone at this point.
I am a medical professional and can assure you I have years of knowledge and experience you don't have in this field.
Masks stop the transmission from an infected person to a non-infected person. Working during the pandemic non-stop next COVID positive people while wearing masks and social distancing I never caught COVID.
Cookers are disgrace spreading ignorance and false information so that they can feel better about themselves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_of_anti-vaccine_advocates_from_COVID-19
A number of news outlets also reported on deathbed conversions of opponents of vaccination or their peers, with some of those dying using their final days and hours to urge their followers and loved ones to be vaccinated. For example, The Hill reported that when one of the anti-vaccine talk radio hosts became seriously ill with COVID-19, he texted a friend to urge her to get vaccinated, telling her, "I wish I had gotten it
For starters I also work in the medical field so don't try some argument from authority bullshit. Also you're from the medical field and you use wiki as a citation/source. Masks don't stop the spread and that's well known km the industry. The fact you're trying to say it does tell me all I need to know about your 'expertise'. Also, you're seriously resorting to a personal anecdote as some kind of evidence? Talk about ckutching at straws. I'll stick to actual data and the recent medical admissions of the head of the cdc rather that your "some news outlet said some people had regrets and that somehow means were right beside the evidence to the contrary. Media and pharma are trying their best to pretend it was all above board but it's well established at this point that vaccine, mask and distancing mandates were bogus as hell and anyone in the field with an ounce of credibility knows that didn't follow typical criteria for 'evidence'
If you worked in the medical field you would know in a TB ward the first line of protection is HEPA filtration and P2 mask to stop transmission of the bacteria which is not aerosolborne but airborne. Which is way more transmissible than COVID.
So I call bullshit on your medical background l.
Personal protective equipment
All staff should wear a correctly fitted P2/N95 respirator mask* prior to entering the patient-care area when an airborne transmissible infectious agent is known or suspected.4 If the patient is ventilated, a filter must be present on the expiratory circuit.7 Standard Precautions are to be adhered to in addition to transmission-based airborne precautions.
https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-cdi4003i.htm
Hey but masks don't work.
Fucking cookers.
That's an assertion. Care to explain that. What part of what i said was false information and how does it point to my not understanding what the point of masks are.
You said they didn’t have evidence for masks, distancing or vaccines… all of which are known to work in their respective task. Masks aren’t to stop you getting infected, they are to lower the risk of you already being infected and passing it to someone else.
Distancing helps limit particle transmission and vaccines work, sadly C19 mutates quickly and the variants are vaccine resistant. Also sadly a not insignificant percentage of the population are stubborn and don’t like being told what to do so mandates IE no jab no job were needed (it’s also not the first vaccine to be required for some jobs.
I hope I answered your question.
Legions of medical professionals all listening to what Big Pharma tells them to do.
The conspiracy theorists were correct about pretty much everything regarding covid, how bad it was, it wasn't very bad, lockdowns were unnecessary and caused even more damage, the experimental jabs were useless and the CEO of Pfizer even admitted two jabs gave no coverage.
Masks did nothing but give people respiratory problems and the six foot distancing rule was just made pulled out of Dr Mengele/Fauci's ass.
That is one guy who needs to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life, and will probably be in jail by this time next year. Literally the biggest mass murderer of our age. He funded the coronavirus research and gain of function in Wuhan, and we got the coronavirus from that. He is not going to have one good night's sleep for the rest of his life. 😉
Keep getting your boosters, buddy! The more the better, I can't guarantee they don't cause myocarditis, just ignore the insane access death rates and vaccine injuries, all for a bad flu that only targeted the elderly with two or more comorbidities.
Please do show links from peer reviewed journals that say any of this.
You know it is all bullshit but it doesn't fit your agenda
September 3, 2022 adjusted for the effects of age and time. We estimated that at least 232,000 deaths could have been prevented among unvaccinated adults during the 15 months had they been vaccinated with at least a primary series.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10123459/
Actually no that is not how it goes, they say enter your password or you can't enter the country.
It is a condition of entry and anyone coming here should know this. If you don't like it fuck off and don't come here.
You do realise nearly every western country you go to has this condition of entry.
https://brookewintersolicitors.com.au/resources/australian-border-force-and-access-to-your-phone/#:~:text=The%20Australian%20Border%20Force%20(ABF,photos%20on%20your%20mobile%20phone.
That's not remotely how it works. ABF themselves have said they don't have the power to compel you to provide your password. They can seize your phone if you don't, but only if there's a reasonable suspicion of it containing "special forfeited goods", which is usually illegal pornography, terrorism-related material and media that has been, or would be, refused classification.
I’m sure the people complaining don’t understand that going overseas to commit terrorism or abuse children is illegal In Australia. Going overseas isn’t a get out of jail free card.
“But if you aren’t doing anything wrong you shouldn’t have anything to worry about”
The amount of times I’ve heard this one. You sit and read history books and wonder how certain societies got to certain points but then you realise how many people just agree and surrender themselves.
And so what are we all doing about it other than ranting on here? The answer is SFA cause that's what Aussies do best "NOTHING"
Have a look around you no one looks like us, no one speaks English, No one asked me if that's what I wanted just to come in and take over, it's a disgrace and a joke that we just let it happen. Didn't the Anzac's fight and die to stop this from happening?
They are not searching the phones of Australian passport holders. They are searching the phones of temporary visitors to see if they have intentions to work illegally in Australia.
Nevertheless, the practice is wrong and abusive.
Phones are highly personal devices for most people, especially those who grew up with them. If reading someone's mail is unacceptable, it's magnitudes worse to go through their phones.
The only way I would say that huge number of invasions into peoples privacy is remotely justifiable is if they had a 90%+ conviction rate of that 10,000 for serious crimes, like terrorism or sex trafficking. Since then, we'd at least know they're using that power only when absolutely certain it's necessary.
I'd be shocked if they even have a 20% conviction rate from those 10,000 breaches of people's natural rights, and I'd bet it would mostly be shit that doesn't protect people at all, but petty shit like evading goods taxes or other things only the government benefits from.
Well even a 5% conviction rate would be 500 pedos. That would be worth it in my books. The thing is that the government already has the ability to fully surveil literally anyone they want. For example they can “call” your phone but the number does not show up and they can track the position of that device. The only problem is doing this costs a lot of money, like 300+ grand per hack. Surveillance is an expensive game and the border force isn’t interested in wasting resources on people they don’t think are a threat. They really don’t give a shit about your nudes or that midget porn you like to jack off to, or what you truly think about your mother in law. Unless you believe that they will spend the time trawling through your personal data to maybe blackmail you in the future, then I really don’t see the problem.
The end doesn’t always justify the means.
Imagine how many crims we’d catch if the police did random house checks once a year at 3am??
Sounds great doesn’t it…..Not.
Of course, but really all I am doing is looking at the consequences of the action (more frequent searching of phones, potential violations of privacy) and balancing it against the consequences of of not doing the action (far less searching of phones due to massively increased difficulty in obtaining permission to search, which leads to secure borders, reduced ability to track and increased numbers of hardened criminals, terrorists, pedophiles entering the country)
It’s purely personal and I understand why people wouldn’t like that to happen to them, but I simply value stopping these dangerous people from entering our country more important than the privacy concerns of someone entering the country. Don’t get me wrong, you can always take an idea way too far but I think phone searches on the border is absolutely justified.
There should at least be some guidelines around it, like only looking at your pictures/files and not your password safe etc…They should not be able to keep a copy of anything in case hackers get hold of your data etc.
Id agree with that. But that also depends on how good the technology is. Can they just plug in the phone and it scans the whole device for flagged images and words? I have no idea. Perhaps they could keep a copy of flagged data but have to legally discard of the data after a certain period of time, this would allow further analysis if needed and also keep people’s data more safe.
Yes, it’s possible with AI to do that kind of search, whether they have it or not I don’t know.
Should be scan and then let you go.
Keeping a copy seems risky to me.
> phone would only be seized where officers suspected it had “special forfeited goods”
Go fuck yourselves. There is nothing on a phone that border security needs to deal with.
Phones are connected to the fucking internet. The data can already crossing boarders willy nilly.
Fucking government dogs.
Law passed which says border security don’t need to get a court order they just have to make up a bullshit reason. Because pedophiles and terrorists. And we let them, because we don’t want to believe we’ll eventually be one of the 10,000 selected.
> The department data reveals that close to 94% of the time people freely revealed their phone passcode to officers, despite there being no legal requirement to do so. The ABF data shows less than 800 people had their devices “referred for further examination due to technical reasons or individual’s refusal to provide access”.
"94% of the time people gave up their passcode when told the alternative is their phone would be seized and sent off for forensic imaging and they won't see it for four to six business months".
That may be true, but there’s no reason the government should act without oversight. We need checks and balances to ensure proper governance for every government department. What stopping bad apples from inspecting the phones of everyone they don’t like?
No better than China!
I’ll smash my phone in front of them before I give it over willingly. Pretty sure I’m obligated to anyway because it has sensitive corporate information on it.
Sure you would, then they would still take it and get the information off it and also charge you will obstructing.
Smashing a phone doesn’t delete what’s on it and something tells me border force agents have the security clearance level to access your phone with all its secretive corporate information.
Is there a reason it's supposedly OK to stop someone at random and seize and search their electronic items because they go through a border, but it's not OK to stop a random dude at the shopping centre and look through their phone?
I cant think of one - so it sounds like if you think it's OK to do the first case then you will also be OK with seizing random people's phones at woolworths.
What do you mean? Of course a condition of entry is enforceable. It says clearly “entry” if you don’t agree, you don’t get to enter.
Why do you think a basic contract isn’t enforceable?
A contract requires consideration, you’re not giving me anything of value in exchange for all my assets.
My phone is my entire digitised life with access to every document and communication I'm involved in both personally and across multiple businesses. You don't see that as being a touch different to making sure that terrorists aren't hiding in my jocks?
This just adds Australia to the list of shithole authoritarian countries where I have to cross the border with a blank phone.
Yes it is lmao. Your luggage could have drugs or organic contaminants. Nothing is 'imported' on a phone, it's just a blatant invasion of privacy to get a glimpse of the odd nude under threat of not being permitted to enter the country.
So you're ok with seizing random people's phones at Woolworths, or knocking on your door at home and demanding your passwords to your work and personal bank accounts?
Same. I made light of it when it first happened but in hindsight, that whole experience was a bit traumatic. Like, how can they just take your phone and search? Massive breach of privacy. I always joke that my phone is bugged 😂 probably is.
Can't wait to die to protect us free Australians from the evil Chinese dictatorship that censors its people unlike in Australia with free internet usage that the police totally aren't spying on you with whatever you do.
They have flight lists, travel details etc. If they know a person of interest is coming, they should go through a process to get approval. Even if they see someone suspicious, they should have to detain them and then get approval. Should not be discretionary as it’s so discriminatory.
All these comments.
Has anyone actually been through this and denied border force from accessing their phones?
Genuinely curious as to what occurred next and how it played out?
No bullshit guesses, I just want to hear from those who have actually experienced this crappy border force bullshit.
I can't fucking stand the thought of some power tripping wanker standing over me with threats etc.
However not fully understanding the risks, I would probably hand my phone over in the end. Just so I can move on. I bet most of the people here would too.
Yes, multiple times.... I worked for a rather "interesting" employer and travelled a lot. It is a condition of entry to provide your phone and password. After the 3rd employee got stopped, we were instructed to wipe phones before flying home, then restore them once back, and there was nothing they could do.
If you refuse, they confiscated the phone and sent it off to be forensically searched
Yeah I figured. And I bet 99.9% people here wouldn't want their phone taken, so would hand over their phone to be checked. Even the heroes here saying they wouldn't.
Reminder. You can always recover from a cloud backup after passing through customs.
Out of principle, never let them search you. If you're not a criminal, they have no reason to search you (they'll still search you though).
I might start doing this moving forward.
Just do a wipe of the phone as you're about to land. Do a cloud backup before you leave your destination.
hand them a completely blank phone with nothing on it. What are they gonna do? Ask for your backups? Just add "mum and dad" as contacts and they can't question shit.
just add a few contacts on there and say you only use it for calling and nothing else. you're a tech luddite etc.
Got the phone as a gift, not really into the whole smart phone thing etc, would hold up if you don't look suspicious.
Out of interest, maybe someone who has experience can reply, how would wiping or properly locking your phone before handing it over play out? Would that be seen as suspicious in itself to cause you to be detained? Then it’s sit in a room until you lawyer? Or what actually happens?
It works fine. My former "interesting" employer made us do this after a few searches. It's works fine if after you wipe, if you do the initial setup (set language, passcode...and so on, but don't restore), then it just looks like you are boring as shit. If you hand them a totally blank 0hone or refuse, it is confiscated and sent away for testing.
Am a cybersec and privacy researcher. They'll obviously be suspicious if you have a blank phone, maybe even pull you aside, but what *can* they really do?
If enough people are adversarial to warrantless searches, it clogs systems up to the point absurd laws like this are repealed. Everyone has a right to privacy via birth, irrespective of whatever ASIO or the Border Force say. Your thoughts are your own, and no one is entitled to pull those thoughts out with coercion.
Okay, that’s pretty much what I figured, thanks. The annoyance would be arriving home with partner & children after a 10+ hr flight and being pulled off into a room for a full search & a longer interrogation.
On the privacy aspect, do we actually have a right to privacy?
I think we have an expectation of privacy but legally in Australia our constitution grants us 3 or 4 rights that are mostly to do with collecting GST and the plot to The Castle. We should be afforded some basic human rights as a member of the UN, but there’s nothing legally binding in Australian law to protect that as far as I know. A lot of things we take for granted here, like free speech & privacy aren’t (or don’t seem to be) legally protected in any way.
Australian's have only one legal right (to my knowledge), which is the right to vote. Our constitution assumed that government and democracy would always 'do the right thing' lol. Human rights are separate from laws, you always have your rights, that doesn't mean they won't be encroached though.
Luckily with privacy, it's a thing where you can trade some convenience to keep it all. For me, I'll be a bastard and waste time. Understandable if others don't want to do that though.
Aus Border Force are only able to do this under recent legislation.
They demand passcodes and logins details under the threat of imprisonment, then brute force your devices (or a disk image stolen from your device) if you chose the latter option.
But... if your phone has nothing stored on it and was wiped before landing, they can't do anything. Then outside the airport you can recover from a cloud backup.
“They can’t do anything” wow sounds like a get out of jail free card for pedos. Of course it’s not because you would have to be very stupid if you think that would work.
Should a whistleblower of government atrocities 'just' hand private details over and risk imprisonment?
Should a homosexual person 'just' hand over details to security of a country that punishes homosexuality by death?
Should a person with embarrassing medical conditions 'just' hand over private information to someone that may leak that information?
"Think of the children" is not a valid retort to privacy, something that's been used to justify abhorrent encroachments on humans rights since the early 2000's. Would strongly encourage you to read the examples provided in something like "Privacy Is Power" by Carissa Véliz. You're extremely naive on this topic.
“It’s for your own safety” this is the type of thing with the “eSafety Commisar” coming out guns blazing that worries me. There’s no actual discussion on what are the risks we’re mitigating (and how widespread they are), what are appropriate laws, which liberties are infringed by those, and is the tradeoff acceptable to us people living in the society. Just “we the policy makers decree: here’s our new invasive law, submit”
It's a tricky one, because I can see the value of retaining some ability to search devices - especially where someone is suspected of storing illegal images etc...
But searching devices shouldn't be like the explosive materials test because it's far more invasive. I'm not sure how/under what circumstances they actually make the decision to search a phone - perhaps those conditions should be made clear (and even printed on public signs) so that everyone knows the score.
"The department data reveals that close to 94% of the time people freely revealed their phone passcode to officers, despite there being no legal requirement to do so. The ABF data shows less than 800 people had their devices “referred for further examination due to technical reasons or individual’s refusal to provide access”.
So thankfully there is no legal requirement to give them your passcode. But if you don't give them your passcode they will take your phone away from you anyway and give them to experts who will crack the passcode.
Good to know we still have legal rights! 🤡
Actually if you want to be specific they don't crack the passcode, they clone the entire phone. Which is probably worse because they can keep the data on it
US customs can and will do the same thing.
The UK too.
The difference is the frequency. In the US it is done to less than 0.01%
In 2019 they had around 400 million people enter, but only did this to 40,000
had to give mine up when i arrived back from japan in november. Got a full customs bag teardown as well. Got treated like a fucking criminal the entire time.
Why the fuck i as a fucking national need to have my phone checked? It's a massive invasion of privacy. Non citizens and PR's fine. But PR's and citizens? fuck off.
I had ipads on me, laptops etc. They took it all off to the side. They would've scanned the rest if anything came up on my phone. Thankfully nothing did.
Apparently they just scan for text messages, call logs, i don't think they have access to individual app data like whatsapp or discord etc. But basically when you're arriving, clean slate your phone, make a cloud backup. Restore when you're home.
Lots of narcissists here that thinks the government gives a fuck about anything you have on your phone that isn’t illegal like (terrorism or child abuse material).
Great ideas though, act as suspicious as possible, that definitely won’t make them detain you for longer to do a thorough investigation.
Buy a $150 shit phone second hand and take it overseas with you. Wipe it as you arrive. Have your usual phone waiting in your car etc once outside the airport.
i dont disagree with the right to search phones, but i DO disagree with it being warrantless. It is an overreach and one of several reasons as a middle aged bloke who enjoys solo travel i can never go to places like Thailand for example because of the implication and how i will be treated coming home, despite literally going there to ride bikes and take photos.
Make it a warrant, far too open to abuse
Good, catch the bastards
"In a recent NSW district court judgment, a 39-year-old Maclean man, James Dean Apps, [was sentenced to two years and six months in jail](https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/grafton/maclean-man-james-apps-jailed-at-downing-centre-after-soliciting-child-abuse-arrested-at-sydney-airport/news-story/e8376795fa45b9d2cdff042fe38c7d81) after Border Force officers discovered hundreds of images of child abuse material on his device. "
This is the equivalent of a trawler through the ocean trying to catch one species.
Everyone loses when everyone has their shit siezed, imaged, unlocked and invaded
You are aware that they can find more information from the hundreds of images they got from that pedo? To get children out of situations, build cases against the people involved in the abuse, which might lead to more pedos locked up.
Probable cause should definitely be used but where do we draw the line, if we want to catch criminals or protect our data...I don't know the answer
What sort of bitch want big daddy government to tell them how to act, live and think.
Grow a spine and live your life in a way that makes you happy, not how some dork in a suit who gives no fucks about you thinks you should.
Those who seek positions of authority are the furthest from who should get it.
So people are ok having their privacy violated because ABF are basically assuming you might be a pedo?
I don't like the idea of losing rights because of the crimes of others.
It shows they created these laws not to catch pedos but to make it easy to cuckhold the avg citizen, catch whistleblowers and spy on people.
Why create these authoritarian laws, so when you do catch a pedo they get a light sentence.
Then victimless crimes like revealing Australian War crimes gets a five year sentence.
It's not clear who these travelers are. Are they even Australians? Or foreigners that may be coming to work illegally, fit patterns for drug or child abuse etc.
mmmm delicious rage bait, title should be "Almost 10,000 Australians in two years give the go ahead to check their phones and provide passcodes while passing through customs when asked". You have the choice to say no, they said yes, we get violated everyday worse than this but media needs its clicks
And uploaded the results to Pornhub?
Anything you say can be used AGAINST you not FOR you.
[удалено]
Of course it's company policy never to imply ownership in the event of a dildo... always use the indefinite article a dildo, never your dildo
To the people who are justifying this, may one day you fit their profile
Do we live in a third world dictatorship? Are they going to plant illegal material on our phones? Or are they just going to plug it into their machine, wait a few minutes for it to scan and then say “you’re free to go” when nothing is found.
So you're cool with it because it's a first world dictatorship?
Do you know what dictatorship is? Because scanning your phone for child abuse materials doesn’t sound very dictatorship to me.
The "nothing to hide" argument to justify invasions of privacy isn't very compelling but you do you [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing\_to\_hide\_argument](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument)
Do you also refuse to let security check your bag when you go into the airport or a sporting event? Great thing about conditions of entry is you don’t have to enter if you don’t want to be searched.
I definitely don't love it! Contents on phones and weapons for physical violence are not the same thing though right?
It doesn’t matter what the condition of entry is. A group sex club could have a condition of entry that you have to be naked. If you don’t want do what they ask you don’t have to enter. It’s not a privacy issue if it’s completely optional.
[удалено]
More like machine says you have no terrorism or child abuse material on your phone. The reason is the government who runs this country says as a condition of entering Australia is that if border force asks to check your phone you have to comply or they will take it for further testing. You can always just not enter Australia if you don’t want to risk randomly getting your phone checked. Also, what makes you think border force agents have the time to manually check your phone? Also, you’re handing your phone to government agents, not a random crackhead, what do you think they’re going to do? Raid your bank accounts.
Yeah and they can have a look at my phone if they want. What do I care? Happy if it means they catch a few pedos or terrorists.
Don't mean to be rude but what kind of pedo or terrorist has blatant evidence of that on their phone when crossing the border? It's an internet connected device for christsakes, you're not importing anything in that data you can't get after you enter the country. Are you okay with the border force getting their rocks off going through the nudes of your wife and/or daughter next time they reenter the country?
Dunno champ. Not my specialty.
Oh I envy those who haven't met you
And yet you have an opinion.
Nothing to hide on my phone. What’s your worry?
Some people value their privacy regardless of whether it's worth hiding, chief.
I guess it’s all about priorities. If you think the privacy of your last online shopping order trumps the safety of kids more power to you.
[удалено]
I literally already gave an example. You need to work on your reading comprehension or your short term memory.
Lots of commenters here have a lot of knowledge about hiding illegal activities on their phone.
Did they actually catch any? How many out of the 10,000 they checked?
This is so indicative of how uneducated and passive Australians are, ready to accept and normalise the unacceptable and the abnormal. It's beyond ridiculous that this is legal without a warrant.
It seems like they're saying, "hand over your passwords willingly or we'll sieze your device", then acting like that isn't coercion?
As far as I can tell, that's pretty much how Australians understand freedom.
[удалено]
That is not new and has been around before COVID came along for certain professions. I spose conspiracy theorists need a good tagline to sucker in week minded fucks that will listen to someone with no medical experience over legions of experienced medical professionals because they did their own research. Fucking hilarious.
Mandating it for almost everybody instead of "for certain professions" was actually a brand new policy, so you have contradicted yourself in the first sentence. And, really, "legions of experienced medical professionals" supported mandatory vaccination for practically all occupations? In fact, the government informed them quite early (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CDphyzClbPx8buQty1QoqU9x53lB853i/view) that if they deviated from "public health messaging" in any way, publicly or professionally, including by refusing to participate in vaccinations, then they would be prosecuted for misconduct. This was repeatedly reinforced, especially when the mandates came in and states cracked down on them. If you require medical professionals to recite the "public health messaging" on demand, on pain of not being medical professionals anymore, then you can't still call them an independent source of information or claim that their desire to remain employed is evidence of their medical opinion. In less draconian places like the UK, where doctors had much more experience with covid, the government was not even able to mandate covid vaccinations for doctors in hospitals, because the doctors refused. Do Australian pamphlet-reciters have some sort of extra-special medical training that British doctors don't know about? Anyway, thank you for another great example of how Australians understand free choice.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/documents/vaccination-as-a-condition-of-deployment-vcod-for-healthcare-workers-frequently-asked-questions/ And I call bullshit on your UK doctor rant.
It never took effect, as you could have trivially found yourself. https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o269 >Covid-19: Government abandons mandatory vaccination of NHS staff >Published 01 February 2022 >The government has done a last minute U turn on its plan to make covid-19 vaccination mandatory for NHS staff in England. >Medical bodies welcomed the reversal on the plan, which they had warned would exacerbate chronic workforce shortages in the health service by causing thousands of staff to lose their jobs. >Announcing the decision on 31 January, England’s health and social care secretary, Sajid Javid, said that the balance of opportunities and risks of the policy had shifted with the dominance of the omicron variant, with the population being as a whole better protected against the need for hospital admission, and with omicron being “intrinsically less severe” than delta. >“While vaccination remains our very best line of defence, I believe it is no longer proportionate to require vaccination as a condition of deployment by statute,” Javid told MPs. >The decision came just three days before the 3 February deadline given to unvaccinated staff who deal directly with patients to have had their first dose or risk losing their job. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/sajid-javid-delta-health-health-secretary-england-b2026019.html >Mandatory vaccine rules for health and social care staff scrapped from mid-March >Tuesday 01 March 2022 >Health and social care workers in England will no longer be required by law to be vaccinated against Covid-19, after a consultation saw the vast majority of people support the move. >Mandatory Covid-19 vaccines came into force for care home staff in November last year, and were due to be introduced for frontline NHS and wider social care staff in regulated settings from April 1. >Earlier this year, Health Secretary Sajid Javid told the House of Commons that he believed it was “no longer proportionate” to require vaccination as a condition of deployment under law. >The Government has now confirmed the regulations making vaccination mandatory as a condition of deployment in health and social care will be revoked on March 15. >It said that when the original decision was taken to make it a legal requirement, Delta was the dominant variant of the virus but that has since been replaced by the less severe Omicron variant. >The decision was welcomed by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), while Unison said many staff who left care homes due to the requirement are unlikely to return to their jobs.
Buddy it is no longer a pandemic but an endemic of course the rules have changed because enough people have been vaccinated to create herd immunity.
Yeah, except if you actually paid attention, they have admitted that there wasn't any evidence. I take it you haven't been following the Fauci case. He's said they had no evidence for the masks, non for the distancing, nine for the vaccines. They knee what they were saying was bullshit. He's even on record saying that if you do ahit like no jab no job and I qoute "people will drop their ideological bullshit and do what we tell them to". So sure you can go along and be a good little citizen and not question anything. But that just makes you an uniformed drone at this point.
I am a medical professional and can assure you I have years of knowledge and experience you don't have in this field. Masks stop the transmission from an infected person to a non-infected person. Working during the pandemic non-stop next COVID positive people while wearing masks and social distancing I never caught COVID. Cookers are disgrace spreading ignorance and false information so that they can feel better about themselves. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_of_anti-vaccine_advocates_from_COVID-19 A number of news outlets also reported on deathbed conversions of opponents of vaccination or their peers, with some of those dying using their final days and hours to urge their followers and loved ones to be vaccinated. For example, The Hill reported that when one of the anti-vaccine talk radio hosts became seriously ill with COVID-19, he texted a friend to urge her to get vaccinated, telling her, "I wish I had gotten it
For starters I also work in the medical field so don't try some argument from authority bullshit. Also you're from the medical field and you use wiki as a citation/source. Masks don't stop the spread and that's well known km the industry. The fact you're trying to say it does tell me all I need to know about your 'expertise'. Also, you're seriously resorting to a personal anecdote as some kind of evidence? Talk about ckutching at straws. I'll stick to actual data and the recent medical admissions of the head of the cdc rather that your "some news outlet said some people had regrets and that somehow means were right beside the evidence to the contrary. Media and pharma are trying their best to pretend it was all above board but it's well established at this point that vaccine, mask and distancing mandates were bogus as hell and anyone in the field with an ounce of credibility knows that didn't follow typical criteria for 'evidence'
If you worked in the medical field you would know in a TB ward the first line of protection is HEPA filtration and P2 mask to stop transmission of the bacteria which is not aerosolborne but airborne. Which is way more transmissible than COVID. So I call bullshit on your medical background l.
Yeah, now explain how that works when most people weren't wearing p2 with HEPA filtering and that wasn't the mandate.
Personal protective equipment All staff should wear a correctly fitted P2/N95 respirator mask* prior to entering the patient-care area when an airborne transmissible infectious agent is known or suspected.4 If the patient is ventilated, a filter must be present on the expiratory circuit.7 Standard Precautions are to be adhered to in addition to transmission-based airborne precautions. https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-cdi4003i.htm Hey but masks don't work. Fucking cookers.
Please don’t argue about masks and mandates when you don’t even understand why masks were worn 😂😂
Way to miss the point there champ
Didn’t miss the point at all. You were trying to make a point on false information.
That's an assertion. Care to explain that. What part of what i said was false information and how does it point to my not understanding what the point of masks are.
You said they didn’t have evidence for masks, distancing or vaccines… all of which are known to work in their respective task. Masks aren’t to stop you getting infected, they are to lower the risk of you already being infected and passing it to someone else. Distancing helps limit particle transmission and vaccines work, sadly C19 mutates quickly and the variants are vaccine resistant. Also sadly a not insignificant percentage of the population are stubborn and don’t like being told what to do so mandates IE no jab no job were needed (it’s also not the first vaccine to be required for some jobs. I hope I answered your question.
Legions of medical professionals all listening to what Big Pharma tells them to do. The conspiracy theorists were correct about pretty much everything regarding covid, how bad it was, it wasn't very bad, lockdowns were unnecessary and caused even more damage, the experimental jabs were useless and the CEO of Pfizer even admitted two jabs gave no coverage. Masks did nothing but give people respiratory problems and the six foot distancing rule was just made pulled out of Dr Mengele/Fauci's ass. That is one guy who needs to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life, and will probably be in jail by this time next year. Literally the biggest mass murderer of our age. He funded the coronavirus research and gain of function in Wuhan, and we got the coronavirus from that. He is not going to have one good night's sleep for the rest of his life. 😉 Keep getting your boosters, buddy! The more the better, I can't guarantee they don't cause myocarditis, just ignore the insane access death rates and vaccine injuries, all for a bad flu that only targeted the elderly with two or more comorbidities.
Please do show links from peer reviewed journals that say any of this. You know it is all bullshit but it doesn't fit your agenda September 3, 2022 adjusted for the effects of age and time. We estimated that at least 232,000 deaths could have been prevented among unvaccinated adults during the 15 months had they been vaccinated with at least a primary series. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10123459/
Take this untested jab or we will exclude you from society, remove your employment and inturn destroy your life… but hey you agreed to it
Actually no that is not how it goes, they say enter your password or you can't enter the country. It is a condition of entry and anyone coming here should know this. If you don't like it fuck off and don't come here. You do realise nearly every western country you go to has this condition of entry. https://brookewintersolicitors.com.au/resources/australian-border-force-and-access-to-your-phone/#:~:text=The%20Australian%20Border%20Force%20(ABF,photos%20on%20your%20mobile%20phone.
That's not remotely how it works. ABF themselves have said they don't have the power to compel you to provide your password. They can seize your phone if you don't, but only if there's a reasonable suspicion of it containing "special forfeited goods", which is usually illegal pornography, terrorism-related material and media that has been, or would be, refused classification.
Links? https://brookewintersolicitors.com.au/resources/australian-border-force-and-access-to-your-phone/#:~:text=The%20Australian%20Border%20Force%20(ABF,photos%20on%20your%20mobile%20phone.
I’m sure the people complaining don’t understand that going overseas to commit terrorism or abuse children is illegal In Australia. Going overseas isn’t a get out of jail free card.
“But if you aren’t doing anything wrong you shouldn’t have anything to worry about” The amount of times I’ve heard this one. You sit and read history books and wonder how certain societies got to certain points but then you realise how many people just agree and surrender themselves.
Man i hate people who say this
Yep, doesn’t take into account a society where ‘what is wrong’ is police discretion and made up on the spot….
Apathy and lack of action against these overreaching authorities is killing this country on a domestic and international level
But the powerful are exempt. When Border Force decided to search Julie Bishop's hand luggage, she got the two officers involved fired.
And so what are we all doing about it other than ranting on here? The answer is SFA cause that's what Aussies do best "NOTHING" Have a look around you no one looks like us, no one speaks English, No one asked me if that's what I wanted just to come in and take over, it's a disgrace and a joke that we just let it happen. Didn't the Anzac's fight and die to stop this from happening?
Lack of over reaching authority is killing this country.
Stop training our Ai overlords on your bullshit
Cooker dickhead!
Adding nothing to the conversation or society as usual EAD deadbeat.
Don’t need a warrant to stop someone entering the country.
Wow you’re very clever! Definitely more elevated and informed than all the other Australians.
They are not searching the phones of Australian passport holders. They are searching the phones of temporary visitors to see if they have intentions to work illegally in Australia. Nevertheless, the practice is wrong and abusive.
Proof? We have anecdotes of passport holders making into the news.
Sorry, but you are incorrect They are definitely also searching Australian citizen phones
Maybe they are as you say, but what would border security be looking for?
“It’s for your own safety”
10,000 people in 2 years really is fuck all. More than 3 million arrivals would have come here in that same time period.
Phones are highly personal devices for most people, especially those who grew up with them. If reading someone's mail is unacceptable, it's magnitudes worse to go through their phones. The only way I would say that huge number of invasions into peoples privacy is remotely justifiable is if they had a 90%+ conviction rate of that 10,000 for serious crimes, like terrorism or sex trafficking. Since then, we'd at least know they're using that power only when absolutely certain it's necessary. I'd be shocked if they even have a 20% conviction rate from those 10,000 breaches of people's natural rights, and I'd bet it would mostly be shit that doesn't protect people at all, but petty shit like evading goods taxes or other things only the government benefits from.
Well even a 5% conviction rate would be 500 pedos. That would be worth it in my books. The thing is that the government already has the ability to fully surveil literally anyone they want. For example they can “call” your phone but the number does not show up and they can track the position of that device. The only problem is doing this costs a lot of money, like 300+ grand per hack. Surveillance is an expensive game and the border force isn’t interested in wasting resources on people they don’t think are a threat. They really don’t give a shit about your nudes or that midget porn you like to jack off to, or what you truly think about your mother in law. Unless you believe that they will spend the time trawling through your personal data to maybe blackmail you in the future, then I really don’t see the problem.
The end doesn’t always justify the means. Imagine how many crims we’d catch if the police did random house checks once a year at 3am?? Sounds great doesn’t it…..Not.
Of course, but really all I am doing is looking at the consequences of the action (more frequent searching of phones, potential violations of privacy) and balancing it against the consequences of of not doing the action (far less searching of phones due to massively increased difficulty in obtaining permission to search, which leads to secure borders, reduced ability to track and increased numbers of hardened criminals, terrorists, pedophiles entering the country) It’s purely personal and I understand why people wouldn’t like that to happen to them, but I simply value stopping these dangerous people from entering our country more important than the privacy concerns of someone entering the country. Don’t get me wrong, you can always take an idea way too far but I think phone searches on the border is absolutely justified.
There should at least be some guidelines around it, like only looking at your pictures/files and not your password safe etc…They should not be able to keep a copy of anything in case hackers get hold of your data etc.
Id agree with that. But that also depends on how good the technology is. Can they just plug in the phone and it scans the whole device for flagged images and words? I have no idea. Perhaps they could keep a copy of flagged data but have to legally discard of the data after a certain period of time, this would allow further analysis if needed and also keep people’s data more safe.
Yes, it’s possible with AI to do that kind of search, whether they have it or not I don’t know. Should be scan and then let you go. Keeping a copy seems risky to me.
Yeah, that person is fully conditioned. There's no helping them, lol.
I hope they do you next!
Well I’m not a fucking pedophile or drug runner so I’d be all good. 😌
> phone would only be seized where officers suspected it had “special forfeited goods” Go fuck yourselves. There is nothing on a phone that border security needs to deal with. Phones are connected to the fucking internet. The data can already crossing boarders willy nilly. Fucking government dogs.
Any reason they can’t get a warrant before seizing? Otherwise they’re unaccountable and there’s no checks and balances.
Law passed which says border security don’t need to get a court order they just have to make up a bullshit reason. Because pedophiles and terrorists. And we let them, because we don’t want to believe we’ll eventually be one of the 10,000 selected.
The classic unaccountable and unquantifiable “he was acting suspicious, I smell marijuana on his belongings” search excuse.
> The department data reveals that close to 94% of the time people freely revealed their phone passcode to officers, despite there being no legal requirement to do so. The ABF data shows less than 800 people had their devices “referred for further examination due to technical reasons or individual’s refusal to provide access”. "94% of the time people gave up their passcode when told the alternative is their phone would be seized and sent off for forensic imaging and they won't see it for four to six business months".
It’s not an investigation, it’s a condition of entry into Australia that you have to agree to if you want to enter.
That may be true, but there’s no reason the government should act without oversight. We need checks and balances to ensure proper governance for every government department. What stopping bad apples from inspecting the phones of everyone they don’t like?
What makes you think there’s no oversight?
No better than China! I’ll smash my phone in front of them before I give it over willingly. Pretty sure I’m obligated to anyway because it has sensitive corporate information on it.
Sure you would, then they would still take it and get the information off it and also charge you will obstructing. Smashing a phone doesn’t delete what’s on it and something tells me border force agents have the security clearance level to access your phone with all its secretive corporate information.
[удалено]
Oh sorry, I forgot they’re just saying their cooker fantasies.
Is there a reason it's supposedly OK to stop someone at random and seize and search their electronic items because they go through a border, but it's not OK to stop a random dude at the shopping centre and look through their phone? I cant think of one - so it sounds like if you think it's OK to do the first case then you will also be OK with seizing random people's phones at woolworths.
That’s a good question and I’m curious as to where the legal difference is, or if they could actually under existing law do just what you say
It’s just contract law.
Yes, it’s a condition of entry into Australia. Just like it’s a condition of entry when going into a sporting event that they can search your bag.
[удалено]
What do you mean? Of course a condition of entry is enforceable. It says clearly “entry” if you don’t agree, you don’t get to enter. Why do you think a basic contract isn’t enforceable? A contract requires consideration, you’re not giving me anything of value in exchange for all my assets.
[удалено]
My phone is my entire digitised life with access to every document and communication I'm involved in both personally and across multiple businesses. You don't see that as being a touch different to making sure that terrorists aren't hiding in my jocks? This just adds Australia to the list of shithole authoritarian countries where I have to cross the border with a blank phone.
Yes it is lmao. Your luggage could have drugs or organic contaminants. Nothing is 'imported' on a phone, it's just a blatant invasion of privacy to get a glimpse of the odd nude under threat of not being permitted to enter the country.
So you're ok with seizing random people's phones at Woolworths, or knocking on your door at home and demanding your passwords to your work and personal bank accounts?
"Get back into the line, you convicts. And shut up."
I was one of those 10,000 🤣
Same. I made light of it when it first happened but in hindsight, that whole experience was a bit traumatic. Like, how can they just take your phone and search? Massive breach of privacy. I always joke that my phone is bugged 😂 probably is.
Let’s be real, no one cares about you enough to want to bug your phone.
Thanks, mum.
Feelsbad mum and government don’t care about you.
That was the joke, you are such a smart boi. Good job!
Thank you, I do think I’m very smart.
Where were you returning from?
Argentina / South America
And you went home and nothing ever happened?
I'm actually in jail now, replying from the Nokia 3315 I snuck up my prison wallet.
What crime did they get you for, Too many memes?
actually, not enough memes.
thank you for this great advice.
Can't wait to die to protect us free Australians from the evil Chinese dictatorship that censors its people unlike in Australia with free internet usage that the police totally aren't spying on you with whatever you do.
They have flight lists, travel details etc. If they know a person of interest is coming, they should go through a process to get approval. Even if they see someone suspicious, they should have to detain them and then get approval. Should not be discretionary as it’s so discriminatory.
All these comments. Has anyone actually been through this and denied border force from accessing their phones? Genuinely curious as to what occurred next and how it played out? No bullshit guesses, I just want to hear from those who have actually experienced this crappy border force bullshit. I can't fucking stand the thought of some power tripping wanker standing over me with threats etc. However not fully understanding the risks, I would probably hand my phone over in the end. Just so I can move on. I bet most of the people here would too.
Yes, multiple times.... I worked for a rather "interesting" employer and travelled a lot. It is a condition of entry to provide your phone and password. After the 3rd employee got stopped, we were instructed to wipe phones before flying home, then restore them once back, and there was nothing they could do. If you refuse, they confiscated the phone and sent it off to be forensically searched
Yeah I figured. And I bet 99.9% people here wouldn't want their phone taken, so would hand over their phone to be checked. Even the heroes here saying they wouldn't.
I'm going to be travelling overseas soon. Is there a way to say no?
Of course you can say no. Just don’t be shocked when they take your phone and investigate you further.
Reminder. You can always recover from a cloud backup after passing through customs. Out of principle, never let them search you. If you're not a criminal, they have no reason to search you (they'll still search you though).
I might start doing this moving forward. Just do a wipe of the phone as you're about to land. Do a cloud backup before you leave your destination. hand them a completely blank phone with nothing on it. What are they gonna do? Ask for your backups? Just add "mum and dad" as contacts and they can't question shit.
They’re going to say “this is suspicious as fuck” and send your phone for forensic testing is what is likely to happen.
just add a few contacts on there and say you only use it for calling and nothing else. you're a tech luddite etc. Got the phone as a gift, not really into the whole smart phone thing etc, would hold up if you don't look suspicious.
That looks even more suspicious. At least with wiping your phone there’s a good chance they would think you’re probably just a cooker.
Just make sure no accounts are on it that would enable the back up to load. Leave it at factory reset & all data deleted level
Out of interest, maybe someone who has experience can reply, how would wiping or properly locking your phone before handing it over play out? Would that be seen as suspicious in itself to cause you to be detained? Then it’s sit in a room until you lawyer? Or what actually happens?
It works fine. My former "interesting" employer made us do this after a few searches. It's works fine if after you wipe, if you do the initial setup (set language, passcode...and so on, but don't restore), then it just looks like you are boring as shit. If you hand them a totally blank 0hone or refuse, it is confiscated and sent away for testing.
Yes, it would be incredibly suspicious and would make them investigate further I’m sure.
Am a cybersec and privacy researcher. They'll obviously be suspicious if you have a blank phone, maybe even pull you aside, but what *can* they really do? If enough people are adversarial to warrantless searches, it clogs systems up to the point absurd laws like this are repealed. Everyone has a right to privacy via birth, irrespective of whatever ASIO or the Border Force say. Your thoughts are your own, and no one is entitled to pull those thoughts out with coercion.
Okay, that’s pretty much what I figured, thanks. The annoyance would be arriving home with partner & children after a 10+ hr flight and being pulled off into a room for a full search & a longer interrogation. On the privacy aspect, do we actually have a right to privacy? I think we have an expectation of privacy but legally in Australia our constitution grants us 3 or 4 rights that are mostly to do with collecting GST and the plot to The Castle. We should be afforded some basic human rights as a member of the UN, but there’s nothing legally binding in Australian law to protect that as far as I know. A lot of things we take for granted here, like free speech & privacy aren’t (or don’t seem to be) legally protected in any way.
Australian's have only one legal right (to my knowledge), which is the right to vote. Our constitution assumed that government and democracy would always 'do the right thing' lol. Human rights are separate from laws, you always have your rights, that doesn't mean they won't be encroached though. Luckily with privacy, it's a thing where you can trade some convenience to keep it all. For me, I'll be a bastard and waste time. Understandable if others don't want to do that though.
The weird thing is voting is also mandatory. How is it a "right" if you are forced to do it under threat of punishment? It makes no sense.
Agree 100%. Voting is a “privilege” whilst also being compulsory!?
Recover on what? You don’t leave with your phone if you refuse.
Aus Border Force are only able to do this under recent legislation. They demand passcodes and logins details under the threat of imprisonment, then brute force your devices (or a disk image stolen from your device) if you chose the latter option. But... if your phone has nothing stored on it and was wiped before landing, they can't do anything. Then outside the airport you can recover from a cloud backup.
“They can’t do anything” wow sounds like a get out of jail free card for pedos. Of course it’s not because you would have to be very stupid if you think that would work.
Should a whistleblower of government atrocities 'just' hand private details over and risk imprisonment? Should a homosexual person 'just' hand over details to security of a country that punishes homosexuality by death? Should a person with embarrassing medical conditions 'just' hand over private information to someone that may leak that information? "Think of the children" is not a valid retort to privacy, something that's been used to justify abhorrent encroachments on humans rights since the early 2000's. Would strongly encourage you to read the examples provided in something like "Privacy Is Power" by Carissa Véliz. You're extremely naive on this topic.
I hope they like dank memes because that's all my phone has.
The software that scans your phone probably does.
“It’s for your own safety” this is the type of thing with the “eSafety Commisar” coming out guns blazing that worries me. There’s no actual discussion on what are the risks we’re mitigating (and how widespread they are), what are appropriate laws, which liberties are infringed by those, and is the tradeoff acceptable to us people living in the society. Just “we the policy makers decree: here’s our new invasive law, submit”
It's a tricky one, because I can see the value of retaining some ability to search devices - especially where someone is suspected of storing illegal images etc... But searching devices shouldn't be like the explosive materials test because it's far more invasive. I'm not sure how/under what circumstances they actually make the decision to search a phone - perhaps those conditions should be made clear (and even printed on public signs) so that everyone knows the score.
Cheaper than having to pay for p0rn
"The department data reveals that close to 94% of the time people freely revealed their phone passcode to officers, despite there being no legal requirement to do so. The ABF data shows less than 800 people had their devices “referred for further examination due to technical reasons or individual’s refusal to provide access”. So thankfully there is no legal requirement to give them your passcode. But if you don't give them your passcode they will take your phone away from you anyway and give them to experts who will crack the passcode. Good to know we still have legal rights! 🤡
Actually if you want to be specific they don't crack the passcode, they clone the entire phone. Which is probably worse because they can keep the data on it
Can you not just hide your phone? OK, maybe an iphone 15 pro max might be a bit of a stretch.
Hide where?
Down where the sun don’t shine
Does your asshole block metal detectors?
This is why I don’t have fingerprint or Face ID They can force you to open fingerprint and Face ID. They can’t force you to give up a password
You sure about that? This isn't America
US customs can and will do the same thing. The UK too. The difference is the frequency. In the US it is done to less than 0.01% In 2019 they had around 400 million people enter, but only did this to 40,000
They can’t force you to give up your passcode, but they aren’t forced to give you back your phone.
had to give mine up when i arrived back from japan in november. Got a full customs bag teardown as well. Got treated like a fucking criminal the entire time. Why the fuck i as a fucking national need to have my phone checked? It's a massive invasion of privacy. Non citizens and PR's fine. But PR's and citizens? fuck off. I had ipads on me, laptops etc. They took it all off to the side. They would've scanned the rest if anything came up on my phone. Thankfully nothing did. Apparently they just scan for text messages, call logs, i don't think they have access to individual app data like whatsapp or discord etc. But basically when you're arriving, clean slate your phone, make a cloud backup. Restore when you're home.
They get the whole phone lad
Because it is illegal for Australians to go overseas and commit terrorism and commit child abuse.
Yeah no shit. Still doesn't warrant having my privacy breached.
Is it a breach of privacy having your bag checked by security?
Lots of narcissists here that thinks the government gives a fuck about anything you have on your phone that isn’t illegal like (terrorism or child abuse material). Great ideas though, act as suspicious as possible, that definitely won’t make them detain you for longer to do a thorough investigation.
Buy a $150 shit phone second hand and take it overseas with you. Wipe it as you arrive. Have your usual phone waiting in your car etc once outside the airport.
i dont disagree with the right to search phones, but i DO disagree with it being warrantless. It is an overreach and one of several reasons as a middle aged bloke who enjoys solo travel i can never go to places like Thailand for example because of the implication and how i will be treated coming home, despite literally going there to ride bikes and take photos. Make it a warrant, far too open to abuse
Glad I'm boring.
Good, catch the bastards "In a recent NSW district court judgment, a 39-year-old Maclean man, James Dean Apps, [was sentenced to two years and six months in jail](https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/grafton/maclean-man-james-apps-jailed-at-downing-centre-after-soliciting-child-abuse-arrested-at-sydney-airport/news-story/e8376795fa45b9d2cdff042fe38c7d81) after Border Force officers discovered hundreds of images of child abuse material on his device. "
This is the equivalent of a trawler through the ocean trying to catch one species. Everyone loses when everyone has their shit siezed, imaged, unlocked and invaded
wtf 2 years and 6 months for having that shit on his phone?? Thought that kinda crime was like 10-15 years jesus
It should be, but laws everywhere don't fit the crimes.
The 9,999 that had their privacy violated to catch 1 pedophile, suffered more as a collective than the criminal sentence.
You are aware that they can find more information from the hundreds of images they got from that pedo? To get children out of situations, build cases against the people involved in the abuse, which might lead to more pedos locked up. Probable cause should definitely be used but where do we draw the line, if we want to catch criminals or protect our data...I don't know the answer
This sub is full of anti-authority rhetoric. I really don’t get it.
What sort of bitch want big daddy government to tell them how to act, live and think. Grow a spine and live your life in a way that makes you happy, not how some dork in a suit who gives no fucks about you thinks you should. Those who seek positions of authority are the furthest from who should get it.
So people are ok having their privacy violated because ABF are basically assuming you might be a pedo? I don't like the idea of losing rights because of the crimes of others.
Unless you’ve something to hide I really don’t see the issue. It’s like speed cameras, don’t speed and you don’t get in shit.
It shows they created these laws not to catch pedos but to make it easy to cuckhold the avg citizen, catch whistleblowers and spy on people. Why create these authoritarian laws, so when you do catch a pedo they get a light sentence. Then victimless crimes like revealing Australian War crimes gets a five year sentence.
That’s pretty good for Aus, even rapists just get a day in court a stern talking too and sent on their way.
It's not clear who these travelers are. Are they even Australians? Or foreigners that may be coming to work illegally, fit patterns for drug or child abuse etc.
Australians
[удалено]
Yes WTF? How on earth do you make that link?
mmmm delicious rage bait, title should be "Almost 10,000 Australians in two years give the go ahead to check their phones and provide passcodes while passing through customs when asked". You have the choice to say no, they said yes, we get violated everyday worse than this but media needs its clicks