13 ms·

Everyone proposing clever technical solutions. Burner phones and encrypted cloud data etc... you are solving the wrong problem. Instead of engineering a way for

Everyone proposing clever technical solutions. Burner phones and encrypted cloud data etc... you are solving the wrong problem. Instead of engineering a way for the few people who care deeply to avoid this at great effort, engineer a way for this to not be legal. Write your congressperson, donate time and money to political parties, make privacy at the border for ALL (not just citizens) a priority in every election.

struppi 10y ago
This! Also, clever technical solutions won't help when not having any data is seen as suspicious. Like, you cannot tell them "I don't know my passowrds. They are in a password safe, and I do not have access right now". When the law says you have to hand over your passwords, "I don't know them right now" is probably not a valid excuse anyway.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
  Do you have any basis for your last point? I legitimately don't know many of my passwords, there's no legal obligation to know them, and the law generally cant compel you to do impossible things (eg, tell them something you don't know). They can subpoena my password safe, just like any other file on my computer, and possibly require I unlock it (this is disputed), but I don't see any reason they can demand I reproduce the contents of the safe that I don't know.
  - nickff 10y ago
    If you say you can't remember your password, they can't force you to remember, but they can tell you to go home. When you're a foreigner attempting to enter the USA, they can simply deny you entry for failing to do what they want. US CBP has the authority to make arbitrary decisions not to admit foreigners, and CBP faces almost no scrutiny. Most other countries give their border guards similar authority with respect to foreigners not entitled to enter by some treaty (e.g. EU).
  - Uehreka 10y ago
    The law only exists to the extent that it is enforced. If customs says "give us your passwords or you're not coming through" and you don't have a lawyer handy, then "give us your passwords or you're not coming through" is now the law (until a judge overturns it and possibly charges the officer for breaking another law). If you can call a lawyer and don't mind waiting several hours, you can challenge it. However most people don't have a lawyer and don't know what to do and are afraid of the officers.
    - KKKKkkkk1 10y ago
      And also, noncitizens do not have a right to contact a lawyer when they are detained at an airport.
    - jellicle 10y ago
      If you call a lawyer in such a situation, they'll tell you that Customs has 100% discretion to admit or deny non-citizens and there is no such thing as "challenging" it.
  - struppi 10y ago
    First, IANAL, and I am not an expert for the situation in the US. So you're probably right. But in the UK, you can go to jail for not disclosing your cryptographic keys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law#United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law#United_King... Here is a story of a person who went to jail for not disclosing his keys: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl/?page=1 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl/?page=1 He said he kept silent "because of principle", but I guess he might also have gone to jail if he told them "I don't remember" - Officers would not believe him anyway.
    - lmm 10y ago
      The prosecution has to show that you know the keys to convict you under that law.
    - bonzini 10y ago
      Even in the UK the two situations are different. In the cases you cited, not surrendering passwords is considered to be contempt of court. At a border, you might be denied entry, which is bad, but that's it.
  - PeterisP 10y ago
    While there's no legal obligation to know them, there's no legal obligation for you to be let through the border - for non-citizens crossing USA border, the explicit legal presumption(starting from [1]) is that you're not fulfilling the conditions of the visa and you have to convince the immigration officer that you are entitled to entry. If they want to check certain information that is not available for you (no matter if the reason is good or not) and they are not convinced otherwise that you don't have any risks, then there's no "beyond reasonable doubt" like in criminal proceedings - if they are not convinced that you're not going to e.g. work in USA, then they have not only the right, but a duty to deny you entry. [1] (b) Every alien 10/ (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15) .
- rasengan0 10y ago
  what about the old My-dog-ate-my-sim-card-routine aka ditching your 2fa token ... like i really don';t know because I denied myself access: "...Then, before you cross the border, make sure you don’t have the SIM card that allows you—or customs officials—to receive that text message, essentially denying yourself the ability to cooperate with agents even if you wanted to. Zdziarski suggests mailing yourself the SIM card, or destroying it and then recovering the accounts with backup codes" https://www.wired.com/2017/02/guide-getting-past-customs-digital-privacy-intact/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/guide-getting-past-customs-dig...
  - Freak_NL 10y ago
    Then you will quite possibly be denied access simply because they cannot harvest your social media profiles for profiling. Kennywinker's comment is right that technological cleverness won't help much here. Carry no devices, and you are suspicious and/or non-cooperative (unless you are over the age of sixty). Carry devices with no data, and you are suspicious and/or non-cooperative. Carry devices with carefully prepared fake profiles and datasets and you might pass muster… or be regarded as suspicious, non-cooperative, and/or actively resisting (if the border agent judging you suspects he is seeing fake data). I wonder how they are trained to react to people without social media accounts.
    - pdpi 10y ago
      > Then you will quite possibly be denied access simply because they cannot harvest your social media profiles for profiling. Not just because they can't. Because you specifically took steps to prevent them from doing it.
      - OJFord 10y ago
        > Because you specifically took steps to prevent them from doing it. ... or I'm travelling with my local SIM to avoid roaming charges?
        pdpi 10y ago
mc32 10y ago
I can see members of congress agreeing to privacy right at the border for citizens --only a very few would support the same for non-citizens, even Dems. There is no political upside to that position and it serves a very small percentage of Americans, indirectly, so, that's not going to fly.
- abandonliberty 10y ago
  You're mostly right. At some point these experiences may affect tourism, business, and desirable immigration. But it's probably too distant of an effect to have that much political capital.
  - davedx 10y ago
    Yeah, who cares about business, tourism and desirable immigration? None of those things are worth much to the US economy I guess. (Our family was seriously considering a touring camper holiday to the US in a year or two. Now: no way in hell.)
    - mc32 10y ago
      All those things are. The question is, how much do these things affect the above? This has been going on since W Bush on; the Obama and to the present, and as of yet, the impact would seem surmountable, i.e. negated by the majority of people who travel anyway and conduct business anyway.
      - xbmcuser 10y ago
        Your life was not online as much that is changing. Facebook didn't even exist under Bush
        mc32 10y ago
        True, but I suspect we will see other countries do the same, not as retaliation, but more because they'll want catch up to the US in terms of border security ...and it will become a normal thing except in third world counties too inept or poor or corrupt to care to implement this where the dissidents will be free from hassle, for a while.
RileyJames 10y ago
Agreed. Technical solutions are a temporary stop gap for those who need to cross the border while the law stands. Or a form of protest, but not a long term solution.
JumpCrisscross 10y ago
I just emailed my U.S. Senators, U.S. Congresswoman, New York State Assemblywoman and Senator as well as New York City Councilman. You can find your representatives here [1]. It's a simple email saying this is an issue you care about. Pretend it's a Hacker News comment... [1] http://act.commoncause.org/site/PageServer?pagename=sunlight_advocacy_list_page http://act.commoncause.org/site/PageServer?pagename=sunlight...
- nickff 10y ago
  According to a number of interviews I've heard, e-mails are the least effective means of lobbying congressional representatives. in-person > phone > lettermail > e-mail
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
czechdeveloper 10y ago
I'm not US citizen. I have no one to contact and no one cares about me. And I will never travel to USA.
- b3lvedere 10y ago
  It's a beautiful country though. Most people are very friendly and they love foreign accents :)
  - vinay427 10y ago
    Unless they're the "wrong" accents in which case you will face discrimination for it in many places. That being said, the better parts are at or near the top of the global spectrum in terms of discrimination from my experience.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    It is a shame this; as a white Brit, I found that America is already great on the individual level. It's just the institutional and political side that's a mess, as well as the dark side that one doesn't see as a tourist. Unless you run into an obstreperous border guard.
    - misingnoglic 10y ago
      That's funny, that's the same thing that Americans say about Iran.
      - b3lvedere 10y ago
        Indeed. I've been to several countries and in most of them it's the same thing: Nice people, bad politics. Makes you wonder why the people keep having bad politicians. Maybe it's time they taught themselves that system a little bit better.
- Buge 10y ago
  It's not just the US. Canada and New Zealand do it as well.
ojii 10y ago
And for people who are not US citizens, the solution is pretty simple too: Don't travel to the US.
- EmielMols 10y ago
  This. If travel is avoidable or exchangeable for another destination, just don't go to the states. As a EU citizen that visited Iran last year I'm no longer eligible for ESTA (visaless entry) and that - combined with these horrific border control policies - honestly made the threshold for me to visit so high, I'll probably never visit again.
  - lb1lf 10y ago
    > As a EU citizen that visited Iran last year I'm no longer eligible for ESTA (visaless entry) and that - combined with these horrific border control policies - honestly made the threshold for me to visit so high, I'll probably never visit again. -My work takes me to most places where there are - or suspected to be - hydrocarbons to be found. When visiting Iran a couple of years ago, the immigration officer leafed through my passport and burst out laughing halfway through. Obviously, I got somewhat concerned - but upon looking up and seeing my worried face, he handed me my passport back and with a chuckle suggested that if he could offer a bit of professional advice, it was that my passport read like an appplication to go to Guantanamo - and I had better get a new one before attempting to visit the US again... (Prior to Iran, I'd been to places like Libya, Algeria, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Indonesia and Uzbekistan.)
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- b3lvedere 10y ago
  Or just don't bring any electronic devices with you on the travel.
  - socket0 10y ago
kogepathic 10y ago
> Everyone proposing clever technical solutions. Burner phones and encrypted cloud data etc... you are solving the wrong problem. Yes, and this is why I will happily pay airlines more to transfer in another country that is not America (e.g. Canada, Mexico). It sucks because it makes travel more expensive, but US airports are not traveler friendly (they could start by having international transfer zones so you don't have to do security again) and the TSA is a bloody nightmare. I also avoid travel to the US. There are plenty of interesting travel destinations which are not America you can visit. For Americans impacted by this, absolutely please write your representatives and ask they tone down this madness. For the rest of the world, if you can avoid traveling to the US, do so. Vote with your wallet and pick somewhere else.
- briandear 10y ago
  Back in the late 1990s, they did used to have transfer zones. I am not sure why they stopped. US airlines lose some non-trivial amount of money especially from Latin American travelers headed to Europe.
  - saryant 10y ago
    Without exit immigration, none of our airports are configured in a way that makes this workable today. There's nothing stopping someone in transit from just walking out the door. Some airports are designed in a way to quickly facilitate this if the government ever changed its mind (IAH and LAX TBIT, I believe), but today none of our airports are set up for international sterile zones. From the perspective of an American departing internationally, this is a bonus since you don't have to wait in line for exit formalities.
- Buge 10y ago
  Canada also requires your password at the border. Recently one guy even faced 1 year in prison for refusing. At least in the US you don't face prison time. New Zealand asks as well.
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
tallanvor 10y ago
On the one hand I agree with you, but on the other hand, not enough Americans even experience what it can be like to go through border control as a citizen.* Even for those who do care, chances are that's not going to be a priority compared to other issues. *I've written before about my experiences having to go through border control after booking last minute trips. I've been living overseas for over 10 years now, and twice I've had to do this twice now - dealing with a glorified mall cop on a power trip when you're trying to get home to see your mother before she dies is a perfect way to make you despise everything about border control.
bugabooh 10y ago
im sorry but i honestly don't understand how any intelligent person could believe writing a letter compares to a technical solution. do you have any evidence that would support your advice for people facing such significant risks?
BinaryWaves 10y ago
Since when has going through proper govt channels ever worked?
- maxerickson 10y ago
  A lot of the biggest successes of US civil rights movements have used proper government channels. For example, women's suffrage was a constitutional amendment. Or the Civil Rights Act. It didn't by any means fix all the problems in the US, but it represented real progress. And then there are the thousands and thousands of lawsuits filed by groups like the ACLU.
greenhatman 10y ago
I think doing both is a good idea. Fight it on both fronts.
cryoshon 10y ago
the technical aspect of this issue is a solvable problem. the social and political aspects of it are not. there's no political traction against this stuff. the border patrol types are too stupid to understand simple and innocent explanations, and treating them as equals is a surefire way to incur their wrath. the way to make privacy at the border work for everyone is for everyone to conspire to keep the border patrol in the dark. throw them a (fake) bone or a (true at first evidence check) lie, and keep moving on.
- LeifCarrotson 10y ago
  > the social and political aspects of it are not. No, they're at least somewhat solveable. It's true that in the long term, those with power will use it to seek more power. But that would seem to imply that the government cannot be peacefully replaced every few years through voting, or that checks and balances cannot keep authoritarianism in check, and that's at least worked for a while. We just need to re-strengthen those limits and develop new rules to account for the new technology. Temporary cultural issues and a lack of understanding are surmountable problems. But you're correct that this social and political change is a lot more difficult than encryption software.
chrismartin 10y ago
I disagree. Maybe people can influence policy in US, but this will still happen to journalists in China, women in Saudi Arabia, suspected drug users in the Philippines, and tomorrow's persecuted minority in tomorrow's undemocratic regime. Technical self-defense measures are imperfect partial workarounds but the best we have to offer for people in these situations.
- Semiapies 10y ago
  Further, why a political solution won't work is right there: this is not an issue most people face or will care about. Even if you manage to stop customs agents from demanding access, some other branch of government will do it, even if it's outright illegal for them to do so. Technical solutions are the only ones that will make a dent.
Fuxy 10y ago
What are you talking about the entire US political system is corrupt by design. Politicians need to beg large corporations for money meaning the corporations own their ass and your fooling yourself if you think your meagre contribution is going to get you heard. Realistically speaking the US was never a democracy but over the year it's turned more and more into a corporatocracy where the only way to get heard is if you are rich or a corporation. If the US government was code I would have scrapped it a long time a go and re-written it but then again don't expect anything to change for the better where it matters since all the interest groups are really good a protecting themselves and as log as they have the money anybody else has no say on the matter.
LordKano 10y ago
They're attempting to solve the problem that they, as individuals, can solve. I have no realistic chance of convincing enough of my fellow Americans that the privacy of foreign nationals who wish to enter this country is more important than maintaining the false sense of security we get by violating it to put any pressure on lawmakers or enforcers of policy and get things changed. What you can do, today, is employ technical measures to prevent the agents at the border from snooping into your private business.
- kennywinker 10y ago
  I thought tech people liked hard problems ;) Please, by all means use whatever technical measures you want at the border. My criticism was of hn commenters armchair quarterbacking, as thought the ability to bypass these checks (at great effort) makes it ok that you have no expectation of privacy.
  - LordKano 10y ago
    Tech people like hard tech problems. We notoriously hate hard people problems. I have mixed feelings on the matter. At an international border, non-citizens shouldn't have an expectation of privacy. At the same time, this man's private sexual preferences shouldn't be used to evaluate his fitness to enter the country.
    - kennywinker 10y ago
      Does violating the privacy of travellers routinely actually make you safer?
      - LordKano 10y ago
        It most likely does not but what you're overlooking is that it makes some people "feel" safer.
lacampbell 10y ago
I think it's very naive to think you can solve this through politics. No political party will solve this issue for you. A minority care, an even smaller minority understand. Thinking you can change a rigged, corrupt system? You've already lost. This is 100% a case where the state needs to be thwarted through technical means.

struppi 10y ago

This! Also, clever technical solutions won't help when not having any data is seen as suspicious. Like, you cannot tell them "I don't know my passowrds. They are in a password safe, and I do not have access right now". When the law says you have to hand over your passwords, "I don't know them right now" is probably not a valid excuse anyway.

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
Do you have any basis for your last point? I legitimately don't know many of my passwords, there's no legal obligation to know them, and the law generally cant compel you to do impossible things (eg, tell them something you don't know). They can subpoena my password safe, just like any other file on my computer, and possibly require I unlock it (this is disputed), but I don't see any reason they can demand I reproduce the contents of the safe that I don't know.
- nickff 10y ago
  If you say you can't remember your password, they can't force you to remember, but they can tell you to go home. When you're a foreigner attempting to enter the USA, they can simply deny you entry for failing to do what they want. US CBP has the authority to make arbitrary decisions not to admit foreigners, and CBP faces almost no scrutiny. Most other countries give their border guards similar authority with respect to foreigners not entitled to enter by some treaty (e.g. EU).
- Uehreka 10y ago
  The law only exists to the extent that it is enforced. If customs says "give us your passwords or you're not coming through" and you don't have a lawyer handy, then "give us your passwords or you're not coming through" is now the law (until a judge overturns it and possibly charges the officer for breaking another law). If you can call a lawyer and don't mind waiting several hours, you can challenge it. However most people don't have a lawyer and don't know what to do and are afraid of the officers.
  - KKKKkkkk1 10y ago
    And also, noncitizens do not have a right to contact a lawyer when they are detained at an airport.
  - jellicle 10y ago
    If you call a lawyer in such a situation, they'll tell you that Customs has 100% discretion to admit or deny non-citizens and there is no such thing as "challenging" it.
- struppi 10y ago
  First, IANAL, and I am not an expert for the situation in the US. So you're probably right. But in the UK, you can go to jail for not disclosing your cryptographic keys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law#United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law#United_King... Here is a story of a person who went to jail for not disclosing his keys: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl/?page=1 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl/?page=1 He said he kept silent "because of principle", but I guess he might also have gone to jail if he told them "I don't remember" - Officers would not believe him anyway.
  - lmm 10y ago
    The prosecution has to show that you know the keys to convict you under that law.
  - bonzini 10y ago
    Even in the UK the two situations are different. In the cases you cited, not surrendering passwords is considered to be contempt of court. At a border, you might be denied entry, which is bad, but that's it.
- PeterisP 10y ago
  While there's no legal obligation to know them, there's no legal obligation for you to be let through the border - for non-citizens crossing USA border, the explicit legal presumption(starting from [1]) is that you're not fulfilling the conditions of the visa and you have to convince the immigration officer that you are entitled to entry. If they want to check certain information that is not available for you (no matter if the reason is good or not) and they are not convinced otherwise that you don't have any risks, then there's no "beyond reasonable doubt" like in criminal proceedings - if they are not convinced that you're not going to e.g. work in USA, then they have not only the right, but a duty to deny you entry. [1] (b) Every alien 10/ (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15) .
rasengan0 10y ago
what about the old My-dog-ate-my-sim-card-routine aka ditching your 2fa token ... like i really don';t know because I denied myself access: "...Then, before you cross the border, make sure you don’t have the SIM card that allows you—or customs officials—to receive that text message, essentially denying yourself the ability to cooperate with agents even if you wanted to. Zdziarski suggests mailing yourself the SIM card, or destroying it and then recovering the accounts with backup codes" https://www.wired.com/2017/02/guide-getting-past-customs-digital-privacy-intact/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/guide-getting-past-customs-dig...
- Freak_NL 10y ago
  Then you will quite possibly be denied access simply because they cannot harvest your social media profiles for profiling. Kennywinker's comment is right that technological cleverness won't help much here. Carry no devices, and you are suspicious and/or non-cooperative (unless you are over the age of sixty). Carry devices with no data, and you are suspicious and/or non-cooperative. Carry devices with carefully prepared fake profiles and datasets and you might pass muster… or be regarded as suspicious, non-cooperative, and/or actively resisting (if the border agent judging you suspects he is seeing fake data). I wonder how they are trained to react to people without social media accounts.
  - pdpi 10y ago
    > Then you will quite possibly be denied access simply because they cannot harvest your social media profiles for profiling. Not just because they can't. Because you specifically took steps to prevent them from doing it.
    - OJFord 10y ago
      > Because you specifically took steps to prevent them from doing it. ... or I'm travelling with my local SIM to avoid roaming charges?
      - pdpi 10y ago

mc32 10y ago

I can see members of congress agreeing to privacy right at the border for citizens --only a very few would support the same for non-citizens, even Dems. There is no political upside to that position and it serves a very small percentage of Americans, indirectly, so, that's not going to fly.

abandonliberty 10y ago
You're mostly right. At some point these experiences may affect tourism, business, and desirable immigration. But it's probably too distant of an effect to have that much political capital.
- davedx 10y ago
  Yeah, who cares about business, tourism and desirable immigration? None of those things are worth much to the US economy I guess. (Our family was seriously considering a touring camper holiday to the US in a year or two. Now: no way in hell.)
  - mc32 10y ago
    All those things are. The question is, how much do these things affect the above? This has been going on since W Bush on; the Obama and to the present, and as of yet, the impact would seem surmountable, i.e. negated by the majority of people who travel anyway and conduct business anyway.
    - xbmcuser 10y ago
      Your life was not online as much that is changing. Facebook didn't even exist under Bush
      - mc32 10y ago
        True, but I suspect we will see other countries do the same, not as retaliation, but more because they'll want catch up to the US in terms of border security ...and it will become a normal thing except in third world counties too inept or poor or corrupt to care to implement this where the dissidents will be free from hassle, for a while.

RileyJames 10y ago

Agreed. Technical solutions are a temporary stop gap for those who need to cross the border while the law stands. Or a form of protest, but not a long term solution.

JumpCrisscross 10y ago

I just emailed my U.S. Senators, U.S. Congresswoman, New York State Assemblywoman and Senator as well as New York City Councilman. You can find your representatives here [1]. It's a simple email saying this is an issue you care about. Pretend it's a Hacker News comment... [1] http://act.commoncause.org/site/PageServer?pagename=sunlight_advocacy_list_page http://act.commoncause.org/site/PageServer?pagename=sunlight...

nickff 10y ago
According to a number of interviews I've heard, e-mails are the least effective means of lobbying congressional representatives. in-person > phone > lettermail > e-mail
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

czechdeveloper 10y ago

I'm not US citizen. I have no one to contact and no one cares about me. And I will never travel to USA.

b3lvedere 10y ago
It's a beautiful country though. Most people are very friendly and they love foreign accents :)
- vinay427 10y ago
  Unless they're the "wrong" accents in which case you will face discrimination for it in many places. That being said, the better parts are at or near the top of the global spectrum in terms of discrimination from my experience.
- pjc50 10y ago
  It is a shame this; as a white Brit, I found that America is already great on the individual level. It's just the institutional and political side that's a mess, as well as the dark side that one doesn't see as a tourist. Unless you run into an obstreperous border guard.
  - misingnoglic 10y ago
    That's funny, that's the same thing that Americans say about Iran.
    - b3lvedere 10y ago
      Indeed. I've been to several countries and in most of them it's the same thing: Nice people, bad politics. Makes you wonder why the people keep having bad politicians. Maybe it's time they taught themselves that system a little bit better.
Buge 10y ago
It's not just the US. Canada and New Zealand do it as well.

ojii 10y ago

And for people who are not US citizens, the solution is pretty simple too: Don't travel to the US.

EmielMols 10y ago
This. If travel is avoidable or exchangeable for another destination, just don't go to the states. As a EU citizen that visited Iran last year I'm no longer eligible for ESTA (visaless entry) and that - combined with these horrific border control policies - honestly made the threshold for me to visit so high, I'll probably never visit again.
- lb1lf 10y ago
  > As a EU citizen that visited Iran last year I'm no longer eligible for ESTA (visaless entry) and that - combined with these horrific border control policies - honestly made the threshold for me to visit so high, I'll probably never visit again. -My work takes me to most places where there are - or suspected to be - hydrocarbons to be found. When visiting Iran a couple of years ago, the immigration officer leafed through my passport and burst out laughing halfway through. Obviously, I got somewhat concerned - but upon looking up and seeing my worried face, he handed me my passport back and with a chuckle suggested that if he could offer a bit of professional advice, it was that my passport read like an appplication to go to Guantanamo - and I had better get a new one before attempting to visit the US again... (Prior to Iran, I'd been to places like Libya, Algeria, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Indonesia and Uzbekistan.)
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
b3lvedere 10y ago
Or just don't bring any electronic devices with you on the travel.
- socket0 10y ago

kogepathic 10y ago

> Everyone proposing clever technical solutions. Burner phones and encrypted cloud data etc... you are solving the wrong problem. Yes, and this is why I will happily pay airlines more to transfer in another country that is not America (e.g. Canada, Mexico). It sucks because it makes travel more expensive, but US airports are not traveler friendly (they could start by having international transfer zones so you don't have to do security again) and the TSA is a bloody nightmare. I also avoid travel to the US. There are plenty of interesting travel destinations which are not America you can visit. For Americans impacted by this, absolutely please write your representatives and ask they tone down this madness. For the rest of the world, if you can avoid traveling to the US, do so. Vote with your wallet and pick somewhere else.

briandear 10y ago
Back in the late 1990s, they did used to have transfer zones. I am not sure why they stopped. US airlines lose some non-trivial amount of money especially from Latin American travelers headed to Europe.
- saryant 10y ago
  Without exit immigration, none of our airports are configured in a way that makes this workable today. There's nothing stopping someone in transit from just walking out the door. Some airports are designed in a way to quickly facilitate this if the government ever changed its mind (IAH and LAX TBIT, I believe), but today none of our airports are set up for international sterile zones. From the perspective of an American departing internationally, this is a bonus since you don't have to wait in line for exit formalities.
Buge 10y ago
Canada also requires your password at the border. Recently one guy even faced 1 year in prison for refusing. At least in the US you don't face prison time. New Zealand asks as well.
- k-mcgrady 10y ago

tallanvor 10y ago

On the one hand I agree with you, but on the other hand, not enough Americans even experience what it can be like to go through border control as a citizen.* Even for those who do care, chances are that's not going to be a priority compared to other issues. *I've written before about my experiences having to go through border control after booking last minute trips. I've been living overseas for over 10 years now, and twice I've had to do this twice now - dealing with a glorified mall cop on a power trip when you're trying to get home to see your mother before she dies is a perfect way to make you despise everything about border control.

bugabooh 10y ago

im sorry but i honestly don't understand how any intelligent person could believe writing a letter compares to a technical solution. do you have any evidence that would support your advice for people facing such significant risks?

BinaryWaves 10y ago

Since when has going through proper govt channels ever worked?

maxerickson 10y ago
A lot of the biggest successes of US civil rights movements have used proper government channels. For example, women's suffrage was a constitutional amendment. Or the Civil Rights Act. It didn't by any means fix all the problems in the US, but it represented real progress. And then there are the thousands and thousands of lawsuits filed by groups like the ACLU.

greenhatman 10y ago

I think doing both is a good idea. Fight it on both fronts.

cryoshon 10y ago

the technical aspect of this issue is a solvable problem. the social and political aspects of it are not. there's no political traction against this stuff. the border patrol types are too stupid to understand simple and innocent explanations, and treating them as equals is a surefire way to incur their wrath. the way to make privacy at the border work for everyone is for everyone to conspire to keep the border patrol in the dark. throw them a (fake) bone or a (true at first evidence check) lie, and keep moving on.

LeifCarrotson 10y ago
> the social and political aspects of it are not. No, they're at least somewhat solveable. It's true that in the long term, those with power will use it to seek more power. But that would seem to imply that the government cannot be peacefully replaced every few years through voting, or that checks and balances cannot keep authoritarianism in check, and that's at least worked for a while. We just need to re-strengthen those limits and develop new rules to account for the new technology. Temporary cultural issues and a lack of understanding are surmountable problems. But you're correct that this social and political change is a lot more difficult than encryption software.

chrismartin 10y ago

I disagree. Maybe people can influence policy in US, but this will still happen to journalists in China, women in Saudi Arabia, suspected drug users in the Philippines, and tomorrow's persecuted minority in tomorrow's undemocratic regime. Technical self-defense measures are imperfect partial workarounds but the best we have to offer for people in these situations.

Semiapies 10y ago
Further, why a political solution won't work is right there: this is not an issue most people face or will care about. Even if you manage to stop customs agents from demanding access, some other branch of government will do it, even if it's outright illegal for them to do so. Technical solutions are the only ones that will make a dent.

Fuxy 10y ago

What are you talking about the entire US political system is corrupt by design. Politicians need to beg large corporations for money meaning the corporations own their ass and your fooling yourself if you think your meagre contribution is going to get you heard. Realistically speaking the US was never a democracy but over the year it's turned more and more into a corporatocracy where the only way to get heard is if you are rich or a corporation. If the US government was code I would have scrapped it a long time a go and re-written it but then again don't expect anything to change for the better where it matters since all the interest groups are really good a protecting themselves and as log as they have the money anybody else has no say on the matter.

LordKano 10y ago

They're attempting to solve the problem that they, as individuals, can solve. I have no realistic chance of convincing enough of my fellow Americans that the privacy of foreign nationals who wish to enter this country is more important than maintaining the false sense of security we get by violating it to put any pressure on lawmakers or enforcers of policy and get things changed. What you can do, today, is employ technical measures to prevent the agents at the border from snooping into your private business.

kennywinker 10y ago
I thought tech people liked hard problems ;) Please, by all means use whatever technical measures you want at the border. My criticism was of hn commenters armchair quarterbacking, as thought the ability to bypass these checks (at great effort) makes it ok that you have no expectation of privacy.
- LordKano 10y ago
  Tech people like hard tech problems. We notoriously hate hard people problems. I have mixed feelings on the matter. At an international border, non-citizens shouldn't have an expectation of privacy. At the same time, this man's private sexual preferences shouldn't be used to evaluate his fitness to enter the country.
  - kennywinker 10y ago
    Does violating the privacy of travellers routinely actually make you safer?
    - LordKano 10y ago
      It most likely does not but what you're overlooking is that it makes some people "feel" safer.

lacampbell 10y ago

I think it's very naive to think you can solve this through politics. No political party will solve this issue for you. A minority care, an even smaller minority understand. Thinking you can change a rigged, corrupt system? You've already lost. This is 100% a case where the state needs to be thwarted through technical means.