
Stop Fabricating Travel Security Advice - imartin2k
https://medium.com/@thegrugq/stop-fabricating-travel-security-advice-35259bf0e869
======
tushar-r
>If the officer demands that you turn on your device but the battery is dead
then it mean that you are unable to comply. Ah ha! A clever loophole that no
one has ever thought of before.

Yeah....about that:

[http://www.etihad.com/en-us/before-you-fly/us-
preclearance/](http://www.etihad.com/en-us/before-you-fly/us-preclearance/)

All guests travelling to the US, UK or Canada from Abu Dhabi International
Airport are required to turn on all electronic devices in their possession
prior to boarding. Guests must ensure that all electronic devices in their
hand luggage or on their person, including mobile phones, tablets and laptops,
are charged to minimize any potential disruption to their journey.

Abu Dhabi Airport does not have a facility to store devices, which cannot be
powered up and Etihad Airways cannot take responsibility for devices which are
left behind.

This requirement is part of enhanced security measures by the authorities of
these countries. Failure to do so may result in not being allowed to take the
device(s) onto the aircraft or being denied access to fly.

~~~
danblick
I seem to recall a story from several years back about bombs being disguised
as laptops. Requiring devices to be powered on was a simple strategy to make
sure they weren't completely fake.

[1]
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/02/11/afri...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/02/11/africa/somalia-
plane-bomb/index.html)

[2] [https://www.fedscoop.com/tsa-targets-explosives-disguised-
tr...](https://www.fedscoop.com/tsa-targets-explosives-disguised-travelers-
electronics/)

I wouldn't be surprised if all electronics had to be powered on for that
reason. (Snooping aside.)

------
verytrivial
> Good travel advice to follow in a later post…

Do not travel to the US until they treat non-citizens as people.

~~~
briandear
Good grief -- do you know how many non-citizens easily enter the US every day?
Thousands. The vast majority have zero issues at all. The reason that these
occasional issues even make the news is because it's outside the ordinary; the
media cherry picks some sympathetic character, "He's a respected Holocaust
historian!" and they turn it into a representative data point that the
immigration enforcement system is off the rails. Combining that with an anti-
Trump narrative, they get more page views and another news cycle to lament the
failure of US policy.

75 MILLION non-citizens visit the United States each year and 41% of those
entered via New York, Miami or Los Angeles.

On a typical day, less than 1000 people are refused entry. Some of the reasons
for refused entry include not having sufficient funds to support themselves
for the duration of the trip, suspicion of being an intended immigrant without
a visa for that purpose, ties to criminal organizations, having overstated a
previous visa, having a dangerous infectious disease, having been found guilty
of crimes of moral turpitude (rape, fraud, child mokestation,) having been
found guilty of a major crime, a lack of proof (in the case of tourists) of
continuing ties to their origin country.

This hyperbole about non-citizens not being treated as people is just
nonsense.

In Schengen (and many other countries, such as Korea), you can get randomly
stopped for visa and passport checks, especially in Germany, Austria and
Switzerland. If you overstay a Schengen visa for even a few days, you can
sometimes expect to endure a more inconvinient immigration experience when
attempting to leave the area (especially in Germany.) You have U.K.
immigration working on Eurostars leaving from Brussels South and also allows
them to actually work in the station. You have Belgium-UK information sharing
and coordination on that route.

There have been instances of U.K. Immigration denying entry to an American
woman carrying a cello because she was to play in a free concert at a
university in Leeds. They deemed that unpaid activity "work," detained her for
8 hours and deported her back to Chicago. Other academic performers have been
denied entry when carrying large instruments as well.

My point: immigration everywhere has seemingly arbitrary, ridiculous
incidents. Should we just stop traveling anywhere?

~~~
justaaron
"a lack of proof (in the case of tourists) of continuing ties to their origin
country."

As a US citizen who has traveled to nearly 60 nations, I have never met a more
accusatory, aggressive, macho, angry, often-times rude reception than in my
land of birth, and I'm a native-born citizen!

While what you say, regarding Schengen border controls, may be somewhat true,
the nature of their "extra procedures" is completely different in quality to
the American counterpart. One doesn't find the systematic large-scale
militarized detention center processes nor attitudes. We are the most
aggressively suspicious nation and yet no one seems to question 1) if it's
even effective. Barring warrant nabs, which a simple ID scan can produce, what
actual harm to the public is being prevented and at what cost to our national
values and business productivity? (to say nothing of the MOOD)

2) if, in fact, foreigners are actually coming over to the USA with the
explicit intent to harm the nation and how you could possibly stop that at a
border, if they were to comply proceduraly. I would warrant that most people
will be hostile to hostile and intrusive questions asked by an irate and
overworked angry border beaurocrat whose only daily joy, as pointed out in the
article, is in exercising their power to expel someone etc...

3) What about Ben Franklin's famous quote and our national values? "Those who
would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

I think that it's clear as the nose on my face that recent top-level
directives and a general change in leadership and policies has resulted in a
more rigorous entry process to the USA and the work culture for these officers
has changed from "be polite cheerful and thorough" to "give em a hard time"

If we can get some acknowledgment of this point, that would be great :D Why
such a sycophantic attitude towards those abusing power?

~~~
knz
> As a US citizen who has traveled to nearly 60 nations, I have never met a
> more accusatory, aggressive, macho, angry, often-times rude reception than
> in my land of birth, and I'm a native-born citizen!

I don't disagree with your other sentiment but this part made me laugh. My
anecdotal experience has been that it varies considerably depending upon the
staff member but generally they are as bored as immigration at every foreign
port I've entered (Sample size of 40+ US entries as a permanent resident at
LAX, ORD, ATL, SFO, IAH, and several land border checkpoints with Canada.
Foreign experience has been NZ, Australia, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Malaysia, UK,
Spain, France, Denmark, and Germany - all major entry points) and never had
issues with US immigration, including one time when a green card expired while
I was out of the country.

I've been grilled more aggressively by UK and Danish immigration! I always
assumed that this was just part of their training to catch people looking to
overstay though.

We have a mix of US and New Zealand passports and I've always put the NZ one
on top - the agent usually starts admiring the design as I hand it over and
the conversation starts on a friendlier note!

------
Nursie
>>People who don’t own laptops, tablets and/or smartphones yet travel
internationally don’t exist anymore.

Let me introduce you to my mother.

No, she's not 80 either, mid 60s. Total technophobe. Owns a PC and
infrequently sends me emails IN ALL CAPS WITH NO PUNCTUATION. Someone gave her
a dumbphone this year, she hates it and has put it in a drawer.

She loves her international travel though.

~~~
kome
I travel with no laptop or cellphone as well. That part of the article was
really bizarre.

------
glenra
> _Do not lie to federal officers. Do not attract attention._

Aren't those in conflict? If you want to not attract attention you want to lie
_an appropriate amount_ , like everyone else does. No more, no less.

For instance, pretending you respect the security personnel and don't mind
obeying their idiotic rules.

Some of the responses given to other rules don't seem...responsive. For
instance, somebody who travels with a freshly-reset phone to restore later
certainly _might_ get extra vetting as a result...but SO WHAT? Going through a
secondary screening is MUCH BETTER than having to give up your actual data.
Isn't it? Given a choice between NOT letting them get your data and LETTING
them get it, in most cases NOT letting them have it seems FAR safer, for the
exact same reasons that it's a bad idea to let the police search your home
without a warrant. You don't know what they plan to DO with your data access,
so you might want to prepare for the worst.

~~~
averagewall
The article is about foreigners. It's not just a choice between letting them
get your data and not letting them get it. Not letting them could also mean
being you turned away and never reliably be able to enter the US for the rest
of your life. For most people, that's probably worse than having your device
and Facebook accessed.

------
twblalock
A lot of the bad travel advice I've seen reminds me of legal conspiracy
theories in general: there is an underlying belief in the existence of magical
incantations or ingenious solutions that will stop law enforcement agents in
their tracks.

~~~
always_good
Reminds me the use of "SWIM" (someone who isn't me) on drug-related message
boards to avoid self-incrimination.

------
Senderman
You know, this all _sounds_ right, but so did the alleged "bad" advice at
first.

There's a lot of uncertainty about this topic right now, and the author fails
to point to any examples or experiences from real-actual-travels to verify any
of the advice being given here, rendering the article as baseless as the kinds
of advice it's attempting to call out.

In truth, I believe he should take a cue from his own headline.

~~~
exolymph
The Grugq is more credible than most social media randoms, although I grant
that it's hard to know that if you aren't aware of his bona fides.

~~~
Senderman
I'm sure that's true. But it doesn't change my core argument: Every time we
write something that reaches a wider audience (social-media-randoms and
pseudo-randoms alike), we have an opportunity to stress to the reader that
they should check these facts for themselves - either by pointing to data and
examples (which my original comment accused our friend grugq of failing to
do), or by simply stating to readers that they should be wary of bad travel
advice and look into it.

Now that I flesh out my argument, I realise I'm scapegoating this article a
bit, and my real lament is that there AREN'T enough accounts and examples of
what to do in these awkward border situations. The only commentary I've seen
from legal professionals is that there "hasn't been a case" yet, which would
flesh out the meaning of the types of demands border agents are allowed to
make.

It's a pretty tricky problem. Democracies are good at improving things inside
their borders, but that stops -at- the border, and the current situation is
the proof. I'm at a loss for now as to how it's going to improve.

------
msimpson
> "Carrying no devices ... interrogated for hours."

Right. So citizens who are aware that the CBP can now peer into their personal
affairs decide to leave their devices at home as a matter of privacy and
principal. Therefore, this makes these citizens suspicious enough to be
interrogated for hours, because:

> People who don’t own laptops, tablets and/or smartphones yet travel
> internationally don’t exist anymore.

Give me a break.

------
tarheeljason
> Because it is normal for people to travel with blank devices, in no way will
> the CBP officer suspect that you have something to hide.

It is common for businesses to issue employees blank laptops specifically for
international travel.

~~~
peteretep

        > It is common
    

Cite?

~~~
evgen
At one time is was common at Facebook to give employees traveling to certain
countries burner laptops and given recent US policies I expect more companies
to enact such policies.

------
burgerdev
> People who don’t own laptops, tablets and/or smartphones yet travel
> internationally don’t exist anymore.

Why would I take my electronics on a leisure trip? Isn't it enough to depend
on them during work hours? Does this really rouse suspicion at CBP?

~~~
leonatan
I don't know why this is downvoted. This is standard practice by many people
who travel, especially if traveling with the whole family.

~~~
sleepychu
They go to a foreign country voluntarily with no comms devices whatsoever?

~~~
douche
I didn't the last time I went on vacation in Europe. My cell phone carrier
also is atrocious and charges usurious international roaming charges, so that
was a contributing factor, but it's really nice to unplug and go off the grid
on vacation. You just have to do things the old fashioned way - print out your
reservations and itinerary, get some maps.

~~~
im3w1l
> My cell phone carrier also is atrocious and charges usurious international
> roaming charges

I sometimes get temporary SIM's when abroad, for this reason.

------
nitwit005
Not having a phone is not going to seem suspicious. Even in the US, there are
still people who don't own cell phones. About 5% according to the Pew Research
center, after I took the difficult step of Googling it.

Plus, some people don't have an international phone plan, or compatible
charger, so they just leave the phone behind.

~~~
viraptor
But what's the number of people who don't own a cell phone _and_ travel
internationally. For example Amish people will be in the first category, but
not the second. Same with many older people.

~~~
evgen
Given the state and costs of international roaming this is when you are least
likely to have your phone. "Sorry officer, my phone is at home. Or is carrier
locked and given roaming costs it is going to be cheaper for me to buy a phone
and pay as you go plan here. Are they any shops in the concourse that you
might suggest for getting one?" A pocket camera and list of phone numbers
completed the set. Obviously don't lie if you actually have a phone, but not
having one is not sufficient ground for detention.

------
SFJulie
This guy says that I would be arrested by the CBP if I want to visit my
brother because I do not see the interest of device other than a camera going
to Florida (near the beach), and no phone because my old nokia is not dual
band (I find the TCO of modern smartphones way to high for my slim budget).

OK I do take a laptop 0.8 with infinite battery, full OCR and cheap printer:
it is called a notebook and a pen (cost 5$).

Hence, thrifty persons are all suspect when going to the USA according to the
author.

Nice mentality!

He is right in a way, I cannot afford to visit my brother so I wouldn't really
have the problem, but when I my finance will get better, I will not revert my
habits: electronic devices are a cost and time sink thus I learned to live
less.

~~~
viraptor
> that I would be arrested by the CBP

That was a sarcastic bit. Later:

> If you are completely naked of any digital devices but aren’t 2 or 80 years
> old, then you are extremely anomalous. Most probably someone that should be
> interviewed by secondary CBP screening…

Secondary screenings happen all the time. Especially for anomalous people. I
keep getting one.

------
iamthepieman
I don't travel that much anymore, but as recently as 5 years ago I traveled
many weeks a year for work. So I have an old travel backpack with a laptop
sleeve and about a dozen pockets, I've cut off some straps and buckles as they
have become frayed and useless but I still use it, mostly in my office, hung
on a hook to keep certain items like survival gear, knives and firestarters
away from my kids (I work from home and you can see where this is going)

We traveled across the U.S. last week for an important family even. At the
11lth hour in a moment of thrift and panic as I realized my 5 children had
commandeered my normal carry-on and luggage, I snagged the old travel
backpack, dumped its contents on my desk and began packing.

13 hours later as my happy brood gathered at the benches on the other side of
the lemmings line I realized something was wrong as the scanner belt kept
going back, and forth, and back with the scanner maw right around, I guessed,
the location of my ill-fated backpack.

15 minutes later when an elderly TSA agent finally found the 10 inch 1/4 inch
thick black coated survival blade[0] in between the padded lining of the
laptop sleeve and the back pad (a perfect place for an idiot, paranoid,
delusional to hide an implement of murder) I was certain I was in for the full
cavity treatment much as my ragged backpack had been.

I'm convinced the only reason i was able to check my carryon WITH the knife
inside it after being perfunctorily and even gently escorted back to the check
in counter is because I myself was so convinced of my innocence and lack of
contraband.

When asked if I had anything sharp or dangerous in my pack I answered a quick
and unabashed "nope" fully convinced of my own lie and maintained this
demeanor until 15 seconds before they pulled the knife from thin air - only
being persuaded of my deceit after seeing the fully empty bowels of my pack
and remembering its former contents.

[0][https://www.topsknives.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/ima...](https://www.topsknives.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/650x/040ec09b1e35df139433887a97daa66f/d/w/dw33-11.jpg)

------
danblick
Also I heard that there is a legal precedent that if the government
confiscates your drugs you can attack them and demand reparations and they
will have to pay.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Opium_War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Opium_War)

------
gst
> Usually phrased as “I don’t know my password it is in a password manager
> which I can’t access.” Or, “there is 2FA setup and I don’t have my second
> factor.” Or other similar technicality. This approach seems to be based on
> the belief that the password itself is the ultimate goal of the system, when
> it has been clearly stated that the goal is access to the content of the
> digital device or the social media account as a requirement for entry into
> the US.

So what is the recommended solution then if I use a password manager? I don't
know any of my passwords and for most websites I'd need the password manager
on my laptop to login. Should I reset my social media passwords to a password
that I can remember before traveling, so that I'm able to surrender the
password if asked at the border?

~~~
viraptor
> So what is the recommended solution then if I use a password manager?

Open the password manager, find the password, and write it down.

~~~
gst
I don't have my personal laptop with me when travelling (because personal
phone and work laptop is sufficient). So that's not really an option.

------
DoofusOfDeath
Perhaps I just missed it (it's late), but I couldn't find anything in the
article backing up the author's claims about how those strategies would play
out.

Was this just a record of his thought experiments?

------
js8
A different article should have been written to a different audience, namely,
the border agencies in the US. Seriously, asking for passwords to social
networks and websites crosses the line, in fact even examining the content of
the devices is walking the line.

Border protection agents should worry about real world threats - bombs,
weapons and such. Not virtual ones. It's totalitarian.

------
Zhenya
'the grugq' has left us with a complete cliff-hanger:

"Good travel advice to follow in a later post…"

~~~
hleszek
which will be composed of just one line: "just avoid the US for now"

------
msoad
What if they ask for your online account passwords?! What should one do?

~~~
Sir_Substance
Not travel to the USA.

~~~
msoad
I live in the US

~~~
maccard
I think the advice still holds, unfortunately. Don't travel across the US
border :/

~~~
Sir_Substance
The situation is far worse than that:

[https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-
zone...](https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-
zone?redirect=constitution-100-mile-border-zone)

~~~
pas
This applies only if you "recently" crossed the border - allegedly, but if CBP
ignores the law, you can't really do much, and the courts usually side with
them.

------
erelde
What about having two (or several) sets of devices, each sets having "a life",
software installed and used etc?

A laptop and smartphone for travel and another set for home.

------
dandare
I am curios if they can make you log in (thus reveal all your secrets) to
THEIR generic Android or iOS phone if you don't carry your phone on purpose.

------
borplk
Not that I think those pieces of advice are particularly good but what does
the author suggest other than surrender?

His post is basically saying "There is nothing you can do about it just
surrender.".

~~~
PeterisP
An aching desire for reality to be different doesn't imply that the advice
isn't correct.

------
boomboomsubban
So anyone that routinely wipes their device or doesn't travel with them is a
criminal, and your best bet is to just comply and hope they're lazy. How does
following any of that advice help the civilian? I only see how a lower
adoption rate helps the border patrol.

------
PepeGomez
It's only meant to intimidate people. There is no way it could serve a real
security purpose.

------
belovedeagle
IANAL either, but the author seems to have missed the point of the "I don’t
know my password it is in a password manager which I can’t access" one (or,
indeed, the blank device — but this one has numerous advantages). Yes, this
will piss off CBP and they will punish you for it, and especially I wouldn't
recommend it if you're not a US citizen but are desirous of entering the US.
But if you're a US citizen, CBP isn't about to risk their position in court:
they will not detain you indefinitely for noncompliance especially when you
have an entirely plausible (and true!) explanation for your inability to
comply.

