5 ms·

You definitely should, but the border agent will also ask for your passwords. If you don't comply, and you're not a citizen, you will be sent back.

winter_blue 7y ago
Is there any basis in the Immigration and Nationality Act for deporting you for refusing to provide you password? From what I understand, it could make it practically impossible to ever return. I’m wondering if not giving your password is a basis for something as serious as this. Does this have any lawful basis?
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  I'm not convinced lawful basis matters in the average persons situation where they're being detained for questioning without access to legal representation, then sent back.
pimeys 7y ago
The saddest thing is this will be the sole reason to not travel to US. Sad, because I have family there now and I do love the people and the culture.
- dTal 7y ago
  The way to travel to the US will be to never physically bring personal data with you. They can't search what's not there.
  - fredsted 7y ago
    You can't win here. It will be suspicious to bring no devices, or devices that look like they've just been restored.
    - anticensor 7y ago
      Not if you are poor enough.
      - jkaplowitz 7y ago
        That used to be true. Poor people can often afford a smartphone now, even in really poor countries like Ethiopia, not just the US. It may be a crappy old or limited model, but it doesn't have to be a feature phone.
    - clouddrover 7y ago
      > It will be suspicious to bring no devices Just like the Chinese government's Integrated Joint Operations Platform surveillance software. "Not using a smartphone" is one of the 36 data points which mark you out as having "suspicious behaviour": https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2019/05/02/china-how-mass-surveillance-works-xinjiang https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2019/05/02/chin...
  - pimeys 7y ago
    My phone is an important part of my diabetes control. Travelling without or giving it away is not an option. I'll survive without it, but will lose the extra control of glucose in an already stressful situation.
- neuronic 7y ago
  The "people and the culture" are what brought this forth.
  - auiya 7y ago
    I never understood this differentiation either. "I like the people but not the leaders". Who do you think put those leaders there in the first place?
    - michelb 7y ago
      Well, not most of the people, even though it advertises as a form of democracy.
kkarakk 7y ago
You can trivially make a partition so that it shows some data when you enter one password and some other data when using another password, next. i did it when i travelled to the US in 2018 but they didn't bother checking att I used veracrypt btw, no way to tell that there is a hidden nested partition without in depth crypto analysis of the harddrive(in which case you're probably screwed anyways)
- gambiting 7y ago
  The problem is that us here on HN can probably take the gamble on it and bypass it either by using burner devices, bringing devices which have been wiped and then restoring them from the cloud, or using plausible deniability encryption like you have. But 99.9999% of travellers to the US don't have the knowledge or access to these methods, so it's completely insignificant in standing up to the surveillance state that US is enforcing. It feels good to say "yeah but I know a way around it" - but the problem still exists.
  - kkarakk 7y ago
    Well the war is already lost imo, customs gets to run roughshod over every right in the name of "national security". all we can do is protect ourselves at this point. The tech big companies don't care to make an issue out of it and the issue is too complex(seemingly) for the every man so no progress is going to be made in the short term(5-10 years) until more tech literate people get elected. All we can do is campaign and mitigate
- neilv 7y ago
  I suggest that people not do this. Were there a perception by someone that you were possibly giving a false statement or violating some other rule (or just disrespecting them), consider how much misery and expenses you might incur, long before lawyers finished debating the question. Minimize travel through problematic places, minimize sensitive data and access that you expose when traveling through problematic places, minimize being clever.
  - kkarakk 7y ago
Nasrudith 7y ago
That sounds like a way to get things fixed best sadly. Do it to big business clients who in face of millions to billions of liability go and tell them to fuck off and let their clients know why they couldn't show up. They aren't doing anything wrong following security policies if the policies weren't already a work around. If it causes an international incident all the better to humiliate them. Sad that the system is so oligarchic but bullies learn only through force.
- dudul 7y ago
  Wouldn't "big business clients" be TSA pre-checked, have global-entry and all the magic keys "big business clients" use to not have to suffer through the same awful things regular peons have to stomach? International incident with whom exactly? What was the fallout of the "incident" when the world found out that the US was spying on NATO allies and heads of state?

winter_blue 7y ago

Is there any basis in the Immigration and Nationality Act for deporting you for refusing to provide you password? From what I understand, it could make it practically impossible to ever return. I’m wondering if not giving your password is a basis for something as serious as this. Does this have any lawful basis?

TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
I'm not convinced lawful basis matters in the average persons situation where they're being detained for questioning without access to legal representation, then sent back.

pimeys 7y ago

The saddest thing is this will be the sole reason to not travel to US. Sad, because I have family there now and I do love the people and the culture.

dTal 7y ago
The way to travel to the US will be to never physically bring personal data with you. They can't search what's not there.
- fredsted 7y ago
  You can't win here. It will be suspicious to bring no devices, or devices that look like they've just been restored.
  - anticensor 7y ago
    Not if you are poor enough.
    - jkaplowitz 7y ago
      That used to be true. Poor people can often afford a smartphone now, even in really poor countries like Ethiopia, not just the US. It may be a crappy old or limited model, but it doesn't have to be a feature phone.
  - clouddrover 7y ago
    > It will be suspicious to bring no devices Just like the Chinese government's Integrated Joint Operations Platform surveillance software. "Not using a smartphone" is one of the 36 data points which mark you out as having "suspicious behaviour": https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2019/05/02/china-how-mass-surveillance-works-xinjiang https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2019/05/02/chin...
- pimeys 7y ago
  My phone is an important part of my diabetes control. Travelling without or giving it away is not an option. I'll survive without it, but will lose the extra control of glucose in an already stressful situation.
neuronic 7y ago
The "people and the culture" are what brought this forth.
- auiya 7y ago
  I never understood this differentiation either. "I like the people but not the leaders". Who do you think put those leaders there in the first place?
  - michelb 7y ago
    Well, not most of the people, even though it advertises as a form of democracy.

kkarakk 7y ago

You can trivially make a partition so that it shows some data when you enter one password and some other data when using another password, next. i did it when i travelled to the US in 2018 but they didn't bother checking att I used veracrypt btw, no way to tell that there is a hidden nested partition without in depth crypto analysis of the harddrive(in which case you're probably screwed anyways)

gambiting 7y ago
The problem is that us here on HN can probably take the gamble on it and bypass it either by using burner devices, bringing devices which have been wiped and then restoring them from the cloud, or using plausible deniability encryption like you have. But 99.9999% of travellers to the US don't have the knowledge or access to these methods, so it's completely insignificant in standing up to the surveillance state that US is enforcing. It feels good to say "yeah but I know a way around it" - but the problem still exists.
- kkarakk 7y ago
  Well the war is already lost imo, customs gets to run roughshod over every right in the name of "national security". all we can do is protect ourselves at this point. The tech big companies don't care to make an issue out of it and the issue is too complex(seemingly) for the every man so no progress is going to be made in the short term(5-10 years) until more tech literate people get elected. All we can do is campaign and mitigate
neilv 7y ago
I suggest that people not do this. Were there a perception by someone that you were possibly giving a false statement or violating some other rule (or just disrespecting them), consider how much misery and expenses you might incur, long before lawyers finished debating the question. Minimize travel through problematic places, minimize sensitive data and access that you expose when traveling through problematic places, minimize being clever.
- kkarakk 7y ago

Nasrudith 7y ago

That sounds like a way to get things fixed best sadly. Do it to big business clients who in face of millions to billions of liability go and tell them to fuck off and let their clients know why they couldn't show up. They aren't doing anything wrong following security policies if the policies weren't already a work around. If it causes an international incident all the better to humiliate them. Sad that the system is so oligarchic but bullies learn only through force.

dudul 7y ago
Wouldn't "big business clients" be TSA pre-checked, have global-entry and all the magic keys "big business clients" use to not have to suffer through the same awful things regular peons have to stomach? International incident with whom exactly? What was the fallout of the "incident" when the world found out that the US was spying on NATO allies and heads of state?