The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's annual privacy report card revealed more details on the agency's controversial policy involving searches of electronic devices at U.S. borders.

The 99-page report was released Thursday...

... with lots of press coverage, but there is actually very little new information here that is relevant to the boarder search debate. The entire relevant section is quoted here:

CBP and ICE may conduct border searches of electronic devices as part of CBP’s mission to interdict and ICE’s mission to investigate violations of federal law at and related to U.S. borders. CBP Officers and ICE Special Agents conduct border searches of electronic devices to determine whether a violation of U.S. law has occurred. These searches have been an integral part of CBP’s and ICE’s border security and law enforcement missions since the inception of their predecessor agencies the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and the U.S. Customs Service. In an effort to provide greater transparency, DHS Headquarters, the DHS Privacy Office, CBP, and ICE have undertaken a PIA that assesses the program in light of the FIPPs to discuss the relative rarity of these searches and the safeguards in place to protect the privacy of travelers subject to such a search. The PIA will be issued during the next reporting year.

To place the practice in perspective, between October 1, 2008 and May 5, 2009, CBP encountered more than 144.4 million travelers at U.S. ports of entry. Of these travelers, approximately 3.1 million (2.2% of the 144.4 million travelers) were referred to secondary inspection; however, CBP only conducted 1,947 searches of electronic media during this time period. A "search" in this regard may be as simple as turning on the device to ensure it is what it purports to be. Detailed information on these searches is only available for those performed on laptops. Of the total number of searches of electronic media, only 696 (0.022% of the 3.1 million travelers referred to secondary inspection) were performed on laptops, which does not necessarily involve an in-depth search of the device. Of the 696 travelers subject to laptop inspection, officers conducted in-depth searches of 40 laptops.

Whats important is that they have agreed to perform a privacy impact assessment, but it will be a long time coming.

It is worth reiterating that although its good to hear that only 40 laptops were subjected to in depth search - the stated policy allows for many many more searches. Where these 40 laptops selected at random? It seems most likely that they were not, and therefore DHS cannot argue that a reasonable suspicion requirement would interfere with the operation of this program as is.