Most active commenters
  • proberts(3)

←back to thread

199 points proberts | 28 comments | | HN request time: 0.002s | source | bottom

I'll be here for the next 5-6 hours. As usual, there are countless topics given the rapidly changing immigration landscape and I'll be guided by whatever you're concerned with. Please remember that I can't provide legal advice on specific cases because I won't have access to all the facts. Please stick to a factual discussion in your questions and I'll try to do the same in my answers.

Edit: I am taking a break now and will return later this afternoon/evening to respond to any comments and answer any questions. Thank you everyone for a great and engaged AMA so far.

1. miotintherain ◴[] No.44006758[source]
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA.

I am traveling to the US soon for work from Europe. I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks. My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection, but times has changed now and it has been happening a lot more frequently. I am wondering what is the best course of action, prior to travel and if asked to give your phone and password. Also, what happens if you refuse to do so? Is the worst case scenario that they will send you back to where you came from?

replies(12): >>44006813 #>>44006967 #>>44007002 #>>44007125 #>>44007126 #>>44007367 #>>44007728 #>>44008325 #>>44008505 #>>44008615 #>>44010040 #>>44011875 #
2. ty6853 ◴[] No.44006813[source]
Not legal advice but I'm a US citizen and when I've refused to answer their intrusive questions the worst that has happened to me is they imprisoned me, stripped me naked and searched me, got a fraudulent warrant for an internal body search, and then sent me the bill after dumping me at the border when they found nothing.

Enjoy.

replies(4): >>44006884 #>>44010554 #>>44011423 #>>44012211 #
3. Exoristos ◴[] No.44006884[source]
Can you explain what fraud was used to obtain the warrant?
replies(1): >>44007709 #
4. lbrito ◴[] No.44006967[source]
Given the very real risks involved, can't your employer waive the travel requirement for the next few years?
replies(1): >>44008839 #
5. BeetleB ◴[] No.44007002[source]
Not a lawer, but the ACLU has a page on this:

Short FAQ:

https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter...

Dedicated article:

https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/can-border-agen...

replies(2): >>44007374 #>>44007846 #
6. david422 ◴[] No.44007125[source]
I'm wondering if anyone uses burner phones. I have an old phone, and a second phone number that I got from Tello for $5 a month, intending to use it for a business number, but then never did. It's currently completely detached from anything personal and I figure if I do need to go over the border I could just use that still for any communication and internet access, but personal details would be at a very bare minimum.
7. twosid3dDice ◴[] No.44007126[source]
Leave gadgets at home. Buy burners here. Access data remotely.

Wipe and dump burners before flight home.

8. proberts ◴[] No.44007367[source]
The short answer is that CBP has the right to ask to see your electronic devices and you have the right to refuse but if you refuse (and you are not a U.S. green card holder or citizen), CBP likely will deny you admission and send you home.
replies(1): >>44007904 #
9. proberts ◴[] No.44007374[source]
Thank you. This is excellent guidance.
10. ty6853 ◴[] No.44007709{3}[source]
Yes.

They claimed a dog alerted on me. An anonymous dog, handled by an unnamed officer in the affidavit, which was used as 3rd party inter-species hearsay via a HSI officer to the assistant attorney and judge.

A dog did not alert on me. In fact it is against CBP policy to use dogs on a person, they are to be used on your articles.

11. mandeepj ◴[] No.44007728[source]
> My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection

Get a burner phone! Upload your entire data to the cloud as well. Either you can store your phone in the check-in luggage or restore your data once you've arrived at your US location.

12. mandeepj ◴[] No.44007846[source]
from [1]:

> Refusal to do so might lead to delay, additional questioning, and/or officers seizing your device for further inspection.

Then, there's no point in denying device search?

[1]: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter...

13. deadbabe ◴[] No.44007904[source]
I had a friend who was asked to unlock her phone, and she did, and then… they did nothing. They watched her do it and moved on to the next question.

Seems like asking someone to do this is just a good test to see the kind of individual they’re dealing with. It’s not practical to thoroughly search phones at scale and plus they know people can just have burner phones anyway. If you’re cagey and combative they know you’re a problem.

replies(2): >>44008776 #>>44010626 #
14. fucalost ◴[] No.44008325[source]
For what it’s worth, I recently travelled to the US from the Middle East (into Houston) and was also concerned about this.

My solution was to delete apps I didn’t want to be searched (e.g. WhatsApp) after having made a cloud backup, then enabling airplane mode.

CBP’s website [1] states:

> Prior to beginning a basic or advanced search, CBP Officers will ensure all data and network connections are disabled

And no, I wasn’t searched (thankfully!)

[1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-searc...

15. belorn ◴[] No.44008505[source]
For any electronic device it is advisable to take a complete backup of the unit, store an encrypted version somewhere online, and then restore the device to factory reset. Do not log in to any account that you wouldn't feel perfectly fine giving up in an inspection.

They can already hijack any phone number, so the only vulnerability you are giving up by crossing the border is the files, call log/sms, and accounts you bring with you.

16. robomartin ◴[] No.44008615[source]
> I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks.

I travel internationally all the time. I work with companies in China, Singapore, Japan, Australia, Europe and Latin America. Meaning, I know lots of people who travel internationally with great frequency. I have never heard from anyone having any such problems. Ever. Not during this administration nor others. Stop listening to idiots pushing false narratives. It's fear mongering. Not real.

Oddly enough, I have been asked more questions when travelling to Canada (Montreal) over the years than almost anywhere else. Nothing serious, thigs like "Why are you travelling to Canada?", "Where are you staying?", "How long?", "Where do you work?", "What's your website and business email?", "Who are you meeting with?", "What is their contact information?", etc. And, BTW, all of this at the standard entry passport check booth, not a side room.

Of course, it feels intrusive when it happens. I look at it as security theater. Just chill and go through the process. Being stupid about this can ruin your trip in any country. Unless you are a diplomat, you are not important enough to bother with. Picking a fight with entry officials in any country will result in bad things happening to you. Don't be that person.

To the point about security theater: Last year we travelled to Mexico on vacation. When we got to the hotel we bought a few supplies. A couple of the items were sealed the type of plastic packaging that you cannot possibly open with your bare hands or teeth. I said "I'll go to the front desk and see if they can let me use a pair of scissors". Without missing a beat, my daughter pulls out a pair of standard size Fiskars scissors from her luggage. Jaw drop moment. She went through security, full scan, and a pair of scissors made it onto the plane. So, yeah, security theater at its best. BTW, the scissors did not make it through security at the airport in Mexico when returning.

BTW, I have also hired Canadian engineers and we've never had problems. You just have to go through the process, hire and attorney and do it right. Which, BTW, is true anywhere in the world.

replies(3): >>44009131 #>>44009240 #>>44009736 #
17. mrguyorama ◴[] No.44008776{3}[source]
It's CBP

It's not actually about any form of screening. It's a power trip. Only the dumbest criminal or terrorist would bring an incriminating device across the border and have any need to say "no" to that request.

Which, stopping dumb criminals and terrorists is important and valuable and they do exist, but nobody applied to work for CBP in order to check the phones of dumb criminals. They applied because they have strong opinions about certain things.

replies(1): >>44010508 #
18. bbarnett ◴[] No.44008839[source]
Culture and society are a road, a path.

What if the current path means a permanent shift. What if this administration seems friendly compared to the next?

19. creaturemachine ◴[] No.44009131[source]
"What are you complaining about? Just be white like me."
20. maronato ◴[] No.44009240[source]
You are misinformed.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44006618

21. brailsafe ◴[] No.44009736[source]
I've heard similar accounts, and anecdotally holds up, although my experience travelling for work specifically is limited. Incidentally, as a Canadian, I've been searched many more times, if not 100% of the time, coming back from the states than going in. Security theater in both directions though for sure, just looking for a slip up. Going in to the states, I once had a slightly vague answer about where I was staying because I'd planned to camp on a long road trip. They pulled me into the lineup and then asked me again, I tried explaining but they just wanted an address and hinted as such, so I just google searched a hotel in front of them and gave them that. They've got boxes to check.
22. briandear ◴[] No.44010040[source]
> it has been happening a lot more frequently.

Is that factual? Or has the media simply been covering it more due to their bias?

International Travelers Processed with Electronic Device Search

Fiscal Year Quarter Total Border Searches Conducted FY 24, Q1 10,937 FY24, Q2 11,273 FY24, Q3 12,090 FY24, Q4 12,658 FY25, Q1 12,092 FY25, Q2 12,260

(The U.S. 2024 fiscal year began on September 28, 2023)

To understand the scale, in FY25 Q2, there were 88 million entries.

So the assertion that 1) electronic searches are statistically meaningful and 2) they are increasing by any significance is just media-fed fear.

One ought to consider the UK’s Terrorism Act of 2000 — the police do not even need reasonable suspicion of a crime to stop and search a person, their vehicle, or electronic devices. https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/07/04/without-suspicion/stop...

You can also be arrested in the UK for the crime of insulting someone. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18102815.amp

23. deadbabe ◴[] No.44010508{4}[source]
Still, if a dumb criminal or terrorist does slip past you, that just means you’re an even bigger idiot. So might as well ask people to unlock the phone.
24. smcin ◴[] No.44010554[source]
Which entry point was that at, and did you enter by air or land?

In particular if it was entering the southern border by land, I heard CBP behavior is much more aggressive.

25. ◴[] No.44010626{3}[source]
26. footy ◴[] No.44011423[source]
> and then sent me the bill

wow, what a horrible way to add insult to injury

27. protocolture ◴[] No.44011875[source]
As early as the last Trump presidency I was seeing people with good opsec doing the following.

1. Backup your device to the cloud (a different cloud than the default if possible)

2. Erase your device

3. Provide your empty / near empty device for inspection.

4. Load the backup after the airport checks.

It might be wise to update this with some basic changes, like creating fake accounts that are auto signed in on your device. Blank twitter account, blank gmail account etc.

28. Nappes ◴[] No.44012211[source]
Bill for what exactly