
'Extreme vetting' would require visitors to US to share contacts and passwords - finid
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/04/trump-extreme-vetting-visitors-to-us-share-contacts-passwords
======
sveme
I'm wondering how my company would react if I declined any further traveling
to the US on business trips. I hated the experience at the US border controls
before, but that goes definitely way beyond anything I would find acceptable.

The cost to the US economy would be way beyond the tiny gains in security, if
there would even be any.

~~~
sqeaky
> if there would even be any.

There wouldn't be. There is no good way to verify someone has access to any
given social media account. If you just say you don't have an account how do
they prove you wrong. Hand 'em your phone with a clean browser history and no
apps installed, then start using your real equipment later.

On the flip side the first time a journal is "randomly" selected and is forced
to give up password this policy will come under extreme scrutiny and lots of
people will be yelling.

~~~
maccard
> Hand 'em your phone with a clean browser history and no apps installed, then
> start using your real equipment later.

Sure fire way to end up being turned away at the border.

~~~
sqeaky
Are they going to turn back everyone with a new or clean phone?

~~~
Jtsummers
With iOS, just backup your device before travel. Reset. Configure it with
basic, but real, accounts. Say an email address you don't use much, some
photos (real, but not all of them), maybe your full music catalog so you've
got options on the flight. A handful of useful apps (like your airline, hotel,
a couple chat clients). Once entered, reset and restore from backup. I imagine
a very similar solution would work for Android.

EDIT: Meant this for the GP.

~~~
KurtMueller
That sounds like a lot of work for something you shouldn't have to do. Are
people going to have to do this with their business phones and laptops? This
whole situation just seems all so ridiculous and prohibitive.

~~~
Jtsummers
Certainly it's ridiculous. Just offering an alternative to entering with a
blank slate device, or a device with all your information on it.

------
jakelazaroff
I really don't understand the logic that leads to decisions like this. The
vaaaaaaast majority of recent terror attacks in the US have been committed by
US citizens.

There really doesn't seem to be any reason for this decision except bigotry
and xenophobia.

~~~
x0x0
True. Also from the article:

    
    
       The Journal report said the DHS official working on the review said 
       questions under consideration included whether visa applicants believe in 
       so-called honor killings, how they view the treatment of women in society, 
       whether they value the “sanctity of human life” and who they view as a 
       legitimate target in a military operation.
    

Do they possibly think people won't figure out the right answers?

~~~
bigbugbag
Well there was a time 15-20 years ago when you had to fill a form with
questions such "do you come to America to kill the president?" and some people
still managed to answer yes to that question and end up denied entry and added
to a ban list if lucky.

~~~
Daishiman
What do you mean? You _still_ have to answer these questions if you want the
simplest of US visas. Source: I've done it.

------
faragon
That's not an incentive for visiting the US as tourist, nor for business. I
would expect that from North Korea, and not from "the land of freedom", unless
foreigners are not considered human beings anymore there.

~~~
sqeaky
Phrases like "The Land of Freedom" are some of the best marketing of all time.
How well does marketing typically match reality?

~~~
faragon
The US is a country of freedom [1], I have no doubt. And I would like
citizens, and residents in general, get as much freedom as possible. I hope it
stays free, so everyone could enjoy their people and their cool stuff, for
mutual fun and profit :-)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World#Country_r...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World#Country_rankings)

~~~
sqeaky
I agree we are freer than we could be. But the poor are not nearly as free as
the rich, the black as free as the white nor the citizens not as free as the
corporations.

Too bad we don't have as much freedom as our richcorporations.

~~~
faragon
Sure. There are places like e.g. North Korea where "rich corporations" don't
abuse the "poor". In my opinion "rich corporations" are necessary, because
Civilization requires economy of scale. And because centralized/planned
("socialist") economy is not flexible, better you learn to deal with "rich
corporations" and hope where you live citizens keep their rights while dealing
with a complex context.

~~~
bigbugbag
You lost me when you jumped from "rich corporation are necessary" to
"civilization requires economy of scale".

There were no rich corporation until very recently in the history of
civilizations, this pretty much debunks the part where rich corporations are
necessary.

~~~
faragon
Sure, you don't need economy of scale if economy of subsistence is enough for
you.

~~~
sqeaky
I think you are artificially connecting the two. I think you can have economy
of scale without having rich corporations. There are many kinds of wealth and
risk aggregation schemes that are potentially better than giving huge amounts
of wealth to a single point of failure.

------
Banthum
Why does the headline present this as a known fact, while the sub-headline
clarifies the fact that this is just a theoretical and unconfirmed
possibility?

"Trump administration’s proposed changes _may_ mean travelers from countries
including UK, France, Australia and Japan have to share digital information"
(emphasis mine).

Maybe they could wait to report until they actually know the information
they're reporting on?

I'm afraid I've learned to totally disregard headlines containing weasel words
like "may", "might", "could", etc. It's a sign of motivated manipulation of
information and click-baitism.

~~~
matt4077
By the time you definitely know what a new policy means its too late to do
anything about it. In this case, there is most definitely a policy making its
way through the administration, and the problems described by the article are
on the table. The mays/coulds/woulds are simply a reflection of the changing
nature of an unfinished document.

The insinuation that the Guardian is just making it up is wrong on its face.
Example:

[Homeland Security Secretary] Kelly told a House homeland security committee
hearing in February: “We want to say for instance, ‘What sites do you visit?
And give us your passwords,’ so that we can see what they do on the internet.
If they don’t want to give us that information then they don’t come.”

So what's a newspaper supposed to do? Not report on it until it is signed law?

------
grizzles
Sounds pretty counterproductive, unless it's designed to keep out democrats /
supporters, not terrorists. Under this system, any serious terrorist is just
going to create a clean legend. Just because terrorists are terrible people
doesn't mean they are also lazy.

~~~
x2f10
>Just because terrorists are terrible people doesn't mean they are also lazy.

Great point. However, this is the same group that thinks a wall is going to
deter multi-millionaire drug lords.

------
Daishiman
As soon as this happens you can say goodbye to the US as the global business
hub.

------
brentm
> Trump administration’s proposed changes may mean travelers from countries
> including UK, France, Australia and Japan have to share digital information

This is absolute garbage. Like everything rating machine DJT does this is
hopefully only for headlines. If it does really happen though expect those
countries to impose the exact same restrictions on us.

Like most Trump plans it doesn't make practical sense. If this password
disclosure was to become a true process once people are aware they will take
corrective actions to hide their online identities. This will stop nothing but
it will impact all of us. I know I am not going to give up my personal details
at the border of any country and it's not fair to expect anyone else to do
that entering this country.

This administration is just so depressing day in and day out, absolute
pandering to the most backwards looking Americans.

~~~
bigbugbag
AFAIK something similar already happens and has been happening at the US
border for some years, this proposed change is attempting to put into law and
generalize an existing practice.

------
panglott
The article states that this would affect travelers on tourist visas from
visa-waiver countries. Madness.

Hopefully this is just a trial balloon that will get shot down in a normal
policy process—these are just ideas being considered.

------
theandrewbailey
This is not necessary. The NSA can get, or already has gotten, this
information. I guess all that intergovernmental data sharing after 9/11 has
stopped, or maybe even the NSA hates the TSA.

~~~
bigbugbag
The NSA having the data NSA does not mean it can be used directly, IIRC FBI
and police forces are required to make an investigation to pretend that's how
the found out.

~~~
theandrewbailey
... but only if the target is domestic. NSA is supposed to spy all they want
to on foreign targets.

------
natch
It seems the Trump people are completely ignorant of the practice of taqiyya
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiya](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiya)).

------
the_hattar
Aside from the obvious issues of principle, why don't people just say they
don't have social accounts? I actually don't have Facebook but even if I did
it seems like a border agent would have a tough time finding it and linking it
to me. It all just seems so unenforceable.

~~~
greeneggs
They can catch you. Lying to federal agents is not a good idea if you want to
stay out of prison.

~~~
bigbugbag
What if I really don't have one, or someone else created one in my name
unbeknownst to me ?

------
wslh
Sadly there is only one US, no country competes with US in business culture
and capital torrent. I cannot close business deals with other people in
different cultures at the speed I do in US, in a win/win condition, and with
enough budget.

This is a very interesting subject to discuss, so please reply if you don't
agree. For 15 years I have been personally doing business with cultures across
more than 30 countries. One of my favorite papers on this subject is "Cultural
Biases in Economic Exchange?" [1]

[1]
[http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/sapienza/htm/cul...](http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/sapienza/htm/cultural_biases.pdf)

~~~
geff82
Concerning speed: I recently bought raw land in the US as a German living in
Germany while staying in Germany. The transaction took a day without me
needing to be present. Never seen such a straight forward land buying process.
Sending the warranty deed to the county clerk was by far the longest taking
part.

~~~
natch
Interesting. Why would you do this? How do you know it was not a scam? And
even if not a scam, how could you be sure you were not wasting your money on
land of low value? Did you research who has rights on the land for mining,
etc. before acting?

I'm not asking to make any point, I'm more curious about this as a lifehack /
investment or how you see it.

~~~
geff82
It was a financial no brainer :) it serves no other use than owning it. It was
surrly not a scam, double checked it all, was working with the county clerk.
Land with Mineral rights costs much more.

