US, Germany, France, Australia and now Canada. With every new country i hear suppressing legitimate Israeli criticism it makes me want to criticize Israel even further.
I am extremely apalled at the actions of Israel and at the identity of Israel itself.
If i didn't have a soldering iron, I'd probably grab a diode or resistor leg, snip it just enough to bridge the gap, press it down on the contacts, use super glue to hold it in place on both sides and the middle until it held and hope the glue doesn't block the contacts.
But this is an extremely shoddy solution and i doubt it will last long. You have to hold it firmly in place or the glue will get underneath the component leg. The user can't let it roll around under the finger. I suggest pressing it against the upper side of the contacts in the picture for leverage. Try it out yourself and see if you can do it. Once you verify with a multimeter you get current through, you can apply more super glue on top between the contacts to give it a little more grip, that may make it hold on for longer. Since it's for a low current application I'm betting just the contact surface of the component leg with the solder blobs underneath will be enough and will not overheat, but i would suggest letting it run a bit just to make sure. You can always make it just a smidge longer in order for the component leg to wrap around the blobs to increase the contact surface, in sort of a C shape.
A soldering iron for students can be pretty cheap and I'm only suggesting this alternative so you have some sort of low cost solution that doesn't involve one. Any diode or resistor will do, really, for like 5 cents and superglue for like 2/3€. Or if you want to put it in a kit just send small snips of tin plated, copper clad steel wire, but depending on how many kits you are manufacturing, it might be more cost effective just to use resistor/diode legs harvested from stuff you've got lying around.
I wasn't necessarily thinking the law would protect the person who did this, but pondering if the existence of that legal framework does not create the impression that this is acceptable, even though it isn't and that's not what the law is.
And also, i do understand this isn't applied everywhere in the US, but to me I see the US as a country. As a foreigner it's probably very unlikely I'm going to refer to it as the law from Connecticut or whatever. I just know this law exists in the US and to be fair I'm not really that interested in knowing specifically where and the nuances of state to state legislation.
But nevertheless i thank you for clarifying the difference between Stand your ground and Castle doctrine and reminding me that it's not a national thing.
This is why stand your ground laws can't realistically exist in places that aren't sparsely populated. Because someone will read "defend your property and life with force if necessary" as "act as a raging lunatic and attempt to shoot anyone who comes at the door because it's legal to do so if you claim you were defending your property, even though there was no indication of actual imminent danger to property or people".
In my country we don't have stand your ground laws. You can only defend yourself in case of an attack, but not drive away a thief. You're supposed to run and call the police, but I keep wondering if a legal framework like the US where you weren't legally punished for attacking a thief in your house wouldn't be fairer but then there's news like this.
Even if such a thing existed, which given the analysis parameters makes it far too complex for automation (like for instance, how would such a software distinguish between old deleted data still residing in empty space and a vault file hidden in empty space without a follow up analysis of the data itself. It would probably alert the user for something, but the amount of false positives would probably lead an untrained user to ignore the alerts eventually) i would guess it doesn't, but if it did, it would have to process petabytes every day, from all over the country and the system would have to be maintained, which going by government record of informatics systems, doesn't seem likely that it would be readily available for everyone that gets stopped at a border stop consistently. It's like an anti virus search, with all the false positives it comes up with, but 100 times slower, plus the transmission of the entire disk clone file, plus the cloning process itself.
Moreover the cost of maintaining such a system when 95%+ of the population doesn't have the know how to use complex data obfuscation measures and LEO rarely obtains information out of these cursory searches for arrests. On published news articles LEO always ends up using snitches, google searches or usage of the TOR network in a given area to catch criminals. Data forensics only come into play later on. Presumably, dollar for dollar, they would probably invest in what works best instead of casting such a wide net.
In sum, I'm not cleared to know such information, but i am guessing such a thing, while technologically possible, seems economically unfeasible and liable to be used only in specific cases. If i had a border security budget, i would certainly not invest in a mega server to swift through every bit of empty and occupied space of all the randomly selected people for a search that come in through the ports of entry. However i could be wrong.
I think you overvalue the skillset of border security. This may seem trivial to you but it's uncommon to hire people trained to this level of competence and put them at every point of entry. A decent cybersecurity investigator needs a big salary.
That would probably happen if you were already a suspect of something or a high profile person and they moved in resources for you. No way border security is randomly sweeping for headers and entropy, they basically just look at it with the explorer and clone it, possibly using some software to scan for known security vulnerabilities to access encrypted parts. That would be a court ordered search or a high profile crime investigation, or maybe a really really unlucky day where the expert was already there for another reason, but the rest i agree.
If your threat model makes you a high profile person, then smuggling data in hidden containers is definitely not the best solution. A non associated personal cloud server is best.
Well most recently this year i crossed US borders at the Texas point of entry. I was told expressly to always provide them with my devices, as if i said no thank you i would be denied entry to the US and it would go on the record for future visa applications, which could be denied on grounds of that, thus affecting future assignments. When you get a work visa, you have a time limit to enter the US and if you miss it, you need another. I was told i was completely responsible for any data that third parties could obtain and i would be fired and legally prosecuted if sensitive data was seen by people who did not have security clearance and NDA clearance for the data i was carrying, which border security does not have, even though some US government personnel do have those clearances.
Fortunately my company provided cloud space for any personal or company data i would be carrying and i wasn't asked for anything because i came from Europe and i guess they weren't too suspicious about me, so in the end it wasn't an issue. Nevertheless, i had to take mandatory corporate training to prepare for any immigration interviews and had to sign specific liability agreements for the data i carry since it is highly sensitive.
I don't just work as a liason in the US, but this was the most recent. For the industry i work in, this is pretty standard.
You can say no, but that doesn't mean there won't be consequences, in my case I'd lose my job or lose assignments, which would probably mean I'd be put only on European assignments or demoted to a domestic only position, which would be paid substantially less. So in essence, i can't really say no nor slack on opsec. Being able to feed my family is more important than protesting on grounds of principle for me. Also i could have issues getting to the US in the future, for any reason that may be, since getting a work visa requires grueling consulate interviews and they check literally everything. It's one of the most annoying places to get work visas to, even coming from Europe. It took me one year of scheduling and attending interviews to be cleared for it. I was even asked to provide all my personal social media account handles.
I guess your company trains to different standards than my company then. A multi national globe operating company can never afford to fire employees for refusing to cooperate with authorities during border checks. At most it can train them to secure data during border crossing.
If the company i work for did what you suggest, they would fire all their employees in the space of a week or have them all detained or refused entry to countries. They'd lose billions in business. Only a domestic or low volume company can afford having their employees routinely detained at borders in such a manner.
It just doesn't make any sense what you're saying, but you do you bud. All the best.
You're free to do that, but seems like a good way to be put on a list to be harassed more in the future. You make a cop/border agent feel stupid and he/she will make sure to make your life harder.
The records will show you're trying different ports of entry and if a border guard doesn't like you, you will be selected for investigation and getting off that list may take years. Worse, you can be banned from entry for no reason and good luck appealing that.
Personally i like to treat the customs agents real nice. I call them sir or ma'am, i follow their instructions and i show them a squeaky clean phone and they let me off with a smile at the first port of entry. Being combative with an agent will not change the laws. Moreover if you have obligations to a company, they will not look kindly to this sort of attrition causing delays and will pass you over next time they need someone. This of course means you won't get paid as much (or, depending on circumstances, at all).
I agree with the other poster, picking battles is the way to go.
They will detain you. I know the US procedure because i was instructed as i worked there as a representative for an overseas company in Europe.
If you're a national of the US they will detain you and hold you in detention to ask you questions. During this time your phone will either be cloned or confiscated to be decrypted at a later date. You will be released after a few hours. They will likely not bruteforce it, but rather attempt to use security flaws present in your device/firmware. They will do the same to your laptop.
If you're not a national of the US, you will be denied entry and flown back to where you came from. This is common practice in a lot of western countries.
What you should do is not carry sensitive information across borders, by using a cloud service to sync at your destination or use hidden encrypted containers in your device. Unless you're involved in terrorism, white collar crime, CSAM or drugs, they will never have people smart enough to find out hidden containers on you.
I'm not saying the government of Canada itself is pushing down a narrative, or the Premier. I understand no such cabal of Jewish zionists exists.
However, when the institutions that protect Canada, such as the Police, are involved in this quasi Zeitgeist around several democratic countries to suppress criticism against Israel, that is just something that i believe we should be unwilling to accept for ourselves.
Whether it is motivated by historical guilt, zionist influence of key members of society, Israeli back door lobbying to protect its interests, anti muslim sentiment, terrorism fear or even just a misunderstood political correctness, it matters not. It is present between us and it is alarming. Many of Israeli actions go against our fundamental values and they should never be above criticism.