
Trump administration approves tougher visa vetting, including social media check - mgiannopoulos
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN18R3F8
======
blhack
The headline here does not really seem to reflect the content of the article:

>The State Department said earlier the tighter vetting would apply to visa
applicants "who have been determined to warrant additional scrutiny in
connection with terrorism or other national security-related visa
ineligibilities."

This sounds like it _authorizes_ them to ask for social media handles
(usernames) for up to 5 years into the past.

This doesn't mean everybody coming into the country has to turn over all of
their social media logins and passwords.

Still ridiculous.

~~~
reustle
> in connection with terrorism or other national security-related visa
> ineligibilities

> Still ridiculous.

I mean, at what level does it becomes not ridiculous to have deeper vetting?

~~~
Veratyr
Disclaimer: I'm an Australian in the US on a work visa.

I'd consider it "not ridiculous" if the vetting was limited to ensuring:

\- That my visa application is valid: If I'm coming to work, I'm doing it for
a real job and I really do have all the necessary qualifications and my travel
plans match my intent.

\- That I'm likely to leave the US. I think it's fine to ask whether I have
ties to my home country or to the US and whether I've broken the terms of
another visa.

\- That I'm not already a criminal. It'd be fine to be asked for a police
report.

I consider the following ridiculous:

\- Anything related to potential future terrorism. If I wanted to enter the US
to kill people, why on earth would I get a visa when I could just cross the
border illegally or use a fake passport?

\- Compelling disclosure of any information a citizen could deny a police
officer who lacked a warrant.

Then again, I understand that the US considers visas to be a privilege and I
respect its choice to deny them to whoever it wishes. If it decides I'm not
good enough, I'm more than happy to take my economic output elsewhere (and I
will if they ever ask for details regarding my online presence).

~~~
graeme
The 9/11 attackers lived in the US on student visas. Some did pilot training
in the US. I believe most of the recent European terrorists have been legally
in those countries (and for that matter, the domestic right wing terrorists in
the US, and the historical left wing terrorists in Europe)

I'm not sure how many terrorist attacks are done by fugitives. Some stuff is
easier to arrange when you have legal status.

Also, cross which border illegally? The Canadian? People who need a visa to
enter the US probably need one to enter Canada too.

~~~
tajen
Most of the European terrorists were even _born_ locally.

I really don't get why getting our Fb accounts is so important, given they
already have it (or should, if NSA/CIA did the job they were assigned to).

------
andymcsherry
This appears not to apply to all applicants. From here:
[https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/05/04/2017-08...](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/05/04/2017-08975/notice-
of-information-collection-under-omb-emergency-review-supplemental-questions-
for-visa)

> Respondents: Immigrant and nonimmigrant visa applicants who have been
> determined to warrant additional scrutiny in connection with terrorism or
> other national security-related visa ineligibilities.

~~~
moonshinefe
Gee look, media leaving out key information in order to get a rise out of
people and more clicks. This in a nutshell is why I try to avoid following US
politics these days (I guess my bad for clicking on it this time heh).

Very interesting how Reuters doesn't mention this only affects 0.5% of people
who apply and whose regular information is deemed to warrant further
investigation. Doesn't sound as sensationalistic when you leave that little
detail out.

~~~
nikdaheratik
The story covered the key point, which is that the way visas are granted has
been changed to be even more arbitrary and have higher potential for abuse
than before.

From everything I've seen so far, the only people who are going to get the
"additional scrutiny" are Muslims, starting with the ones from the countries
listed in the travel ban. The administration added the "national security"
language in order to protect themselves in court, but it reads the same as any
other instance of government abuse throughout American history. The people in
the group being targeted will be required to jump over increasingly higher
hurdles (like 15 years of biographical history) while everyone else gets to
just step around it.

------
hoodoof
".... and discourage international students and scientists from coming to the
United States."

Not just students and scientists - it will discourage everyone from coming to
the United States, as if it wasn't unappealing already.

Tourists will go elsewhere. It's good for tourism in other countries.

Important to remember though that these Trump decisions are the will of the
people - democracy in action.

~~~
wapz
> these Trump decisions are the will of the people

I wouldn't say his decisions are the will of the people but rather the result
of the political system in action.

------
kobeya
Absolutely unbelievable. It is just unconscionable to require handing over
this sort of information. How do we stop this madness?

Watch while China reciprocates and see how much US business travelers like
that.

------
maxxxxx
If I didn't live here already I don't think I would ever travel to the US
unless I absolutely couldn't avoid it. I am already really nervous that I have
to give them my laptop or phone with passwords so they can poke around my
E-mails.

------
NTDF9
What if I don't remember what accounts I have? There are so many accounts with
so many aliases, I don't even remember defunct accounts.

Also, does email count as social media?

------
Mtinie
People won't include the social media accounts they don't want to call
attention to.

Net effect: Not safer as a whole, but we'll see how deep the social network
surveillance actually goes and how good the pseudo-anonymous attribution
algorithms really are.

~~~
CaptainZapp

      People won't include the social media accounts they don't want to call attention to.
    

Which is extremely risky. Depending on your profile they may find you with a
simple search and having lied on your visa application or to an immigration
officer will get you barred to visit the US for years.

And that's your best case scenario.

~~~
Mtinie
A "simple search" in the days of TOR and anonymous accounts isn't so simple.

Ergo, the second part of my comment about how well those "hidden" accounts can
be uncovered.

------
ouid
what if you just don't use social media?

~~~
avaer
The most horrifying part of this for me is that (as someone who doesn't want
to be part of the Facebook grind)... this actually compels me to sign up for
Facebook for business visa reasons.

So in a way this policy nudges me to patronize the business of particular
named corporations.

------
johansch
Submitting a complete record of 15 years of travel history would be quite
challenging to many people, to say the least.

~~~
isostatic
I applied for an Indian visa a couple months ago. The page gave me 100
characters to list countries I'd visited in the previous few years. If I used
2 letter abbreviations and skipped the commas I could have just about done it.
As it stands I started at NZ and moved west. Ran out of space just before
listing Pakistan. Oh well.

~~~
mac01021
Why do you visit so many countries?

~~~
1024core
That's nobody's business. Maybe s/he likes to travel. Especially if you're in
EU where there are practically no borders west of Russia, you can visit dozens
of countries without sweat.

~~~
isostatic
It's quite simple, I work for a multinational company with offices in about
100 counties. Add 20 or so countries in Europe which are easy enough to visit
for a weekend break and 50 is quite a small number. Most people I know have
visited at least 10 counties in the last 10 years, and many have visited 20+,
just for tourist purposes

------
wsxcde
What does social media include? Will I have to list my HN and reddit
usernames? What about throwaways, am I expected to list those too?

~~~
isostatic
Yes

~~~
itg
Would be nice if HN gave the ability to delete your account for people who
need that option.

~~~
throw555555
I asked HN about changing my handle which I made long back, they said
something similar to "we dont have the technical expertise to change it". If
an HN moderator is reading this. Well its for you.

------
einfach
Social media _handles_

> The Trump administration has rolled out a new questionnaire for U.S. visa
> applicants worldwide that asks for social media handles for the last five
> years and biographical information going back 15 years.

Including social media handles is quite different than what the title implies
with "accounts"

Edit: Yay the post title was fixed!

~~~
1024core
What the fuck is a 'handle' ?

~~~
einfach
1024core in your case

~~~
1024core
But is HN 'social media'?

~~~
blhack
Yes.

------
GhostVII
This seems pretty reasonable... It's not like you are giving them your
passwords or anything, your just telling them your public online name, which
they could probably find by googling you anyways.

------
kingofpandora
I've already had to provide my social media account names (although not access
to those accounts) at the US border as a foreigner trying to enter the
country. This was about one year ago.

------
cyphunk
Does anyone know if this, like requests for passwords or decrypting data at
border, can be ground to refuse entry if the person denies access?

