/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

Senator Ron Wyden reveals the CBP told Congress it adds data from ~10K travelers' devices per year to a database, accessible by 2,700 officers without a warrant

Washington Post Drew Harwell

Context & Ripple Effects

Wyden has been pulling this thread for years: CBP's own letters to him in 2017 conceded it lacked authority to reach travelers' cloud accounts at the border while claiming free rein over local device data, and by 2019 the agency was reporting 30,000 warrantless device searches in a single year, up roughly fourfold from three years prior. The new disclosure changes the shape of the problem: what was framed as an episodic inspection at the border is now a standing pipeline, with data from roughly 10,000 travelers' devices per year flowing into a database any of 2,700 officers can query without a warrant.

First-order effects

  • Travelers whose devices are searched no longer face a one-time extraction — their data persists in a CBP database where 2,700 officers can access it indefinitely without individual warrants or probable cause tied to each query.

Second-order effects

  • The database converts CBP's 2017 position — local data fair game, cloud off-limits — into de facto bulk retention, handing Wyden and allies a concrete target alongside the CIA bulk collection program he and Heinrich exposed earlier this year as Congress weighs warrant requirements for agency-held Americans' data.

Third-order effects

  • If the pattern holds, border-search authority becomes a back door to domestic surveillance infrastructure: agencies argue each step (local search, retention, broad internal access) is lawful in isolation while the aggregate functions as a warrantless database — pushing the fight toward legislation like the authorization riders Wyden flagged in 2016 and court challenges over Fourth Amendment scope.

The trend: Border device searches are drifting from case-by-case inspections into standing warrantless databases, with Wyden's disclosures serving as the primary oversight mechanism forcing the issue into Congress.

Discussion

  • @drewharwell Drew Harwell on x
    New: The government has a giant database of info taken from the phones of “suspicious” travelers at airports and borders. Data from up to 10,000 phones - call logs, contacts, messages - is added each year; kept for 15 years; and searchable for CBP staff https://www.washingtonpost…
  • @lysanderboomer @lysanderboomer on x
    It has always been my policy that when I travel overseas, I carry a cheap / disposable cell phone and ensure that it is wiped any time I cross a border. I also recommend leaving computers at home and bringing a “throwaway” device. https://www.msn.com/...
  • @brianhonan @brianhonan on x
    and people ask me why I always turn my phone and other electronic devices off when crossing borders, including US https://twitter.com/...
  • @justinhendrix Justin Hendrix on x
    Really trying to compete with the Chinese surveillance state, aren't we. Just can't be outdone. https://twitter.com/...
  • @dellcam Dell Cameron on x
    CBP's response indicates agents can search this data—w/o reasonable suspicion—using automated targeting. In practice this would potentially involve running contact lists from ~10K phones each year through an array of govt databases, including FBI's. Millions of names. No warrant.…
  • @nakashimae Ellen Nakashima on x
    @drewharwell OMG. Automated Targeting System again. I'm having flashbacks to 2006, when this first raised major privacy issues: https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
  • @rondeibert @rondeibert on x
    Borders are rights-free, data vacuum cleaning zones. Customs officials have copied Americans' phone data at massive scale https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
  • @ronwyden Ron Wyden on x
    I uncovered that customs and border officials are storing a massive trove of data from the personal devices of Americans who reenter the country. This is an egregious violation of Americans' rights. I won't stop fighting to hold the government accountable for its overreach. https…
  • @eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
    3/ The privacy activists focused exclusively on the privacy threats presented by programmatic advertising, no matter how merely theoretical, remind me of the misinfo/disinfo researchers that only investigate social media and not cable news.
  • @mmasnick Mike Masnick on x
    Seems like the sorta thing @RonWyden has been talking about for many, many years, and which the rest of Congress regularly ignores... https://twitter.com/...
  • @washingtonpost @washingtonpost on x
    U.S. government officials are adding data from as many as 10,000 electronic devices each year to a massive database they've compiled from cellphones, iPads and computers seized from travelers at the country's airports, seaports and border crossings. https://www.washingtonpost.com…
  • @jakelaperruque @jakelaperruque on x
    There is absolutely no reason for the Fourth Amendment that exists for border searches to apply to phones and other electronic devices @RonWyden has been pushing the Protecting Data at the Border Act for years to fix this problem - this type of abuse is the reason we need to act …
  • @kateo Kate O'Neill on x
    “...the threshold for such searches is so low that the authorities could end up grabbing data from 'a lot of people in addition to potential “bad guys,"'with some 'targeted because they look a certain way or have a certain religion.'" 👀⁩ https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
  • @tonyajoriley Tonya Riley on x
    “CBP should not dump data obtained through thousands of warrantless phone searches into a central database, retain the data for fifteen years, and allow thousands of DHS employees to search through Americans' personal data whenever they want.” @RonWyden https://www.wyden.senate.g…
  • @kurtopsahl Kurt Opsahl on x
    Contacts, call logs, messages and photos from up to 10,000 travelers' phones are saved to a government database every year, and 2,700 CBP officers can access it without a warrant. This is not a reasonable search process. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
  • @adamsessler @adamsessler on x
    Does this department have any purpose outside of stupid, evil shit? https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
  • @shanvav Shannon Vavra on x
    The USG has a database of info taken from travelers' phones at checkpoints, with the default to download contacts, call logs & messages—and they're adding up to 10K travelers' info annually. CBP officers can search without a warrant. @drewharwell reports https://www.washingtonpos…
  • @eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
    2/ An instructive thought experiment: if we know someone was convicted of a crime via smartphone-scoped data, is it more likely that 1) the data was aggregated via the advertising bidstream, or 2) police simply confiscated the phone and looked through it? https://www.washingtonpo…
  • @eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
    Yes, programmatic advertising creates a privacy liability, but it can be rectified with focused remedies that wont devitalize the internet economy, vs “banning surveillance capitalism.” What Id ask privacy activists: why arent you more concerned with this? https://www.washingtonp…