
Author of cURL denied entry to the USA - chx
https://twitter.com/bagder/status/879198063998513152
======
y0ghur7_xxx
This may be unpopular on an US-centric site like HN, but the US looks more and
more like they want to isolate themselves from the rest of the world: very
strict immigration policy, travelers molested by TSA on airports, ...

These conferences where people around the world meet should start to be hosted
somewhere else. Not in the USA anymore. Somewhere in a country that welcomes
people instead of treating all of them like possible threats.

Just organize All Hands in Berlin next year. Or Barcelona, or Munich, or
Stockholm, or Amsterdam, or whatever. Just not the US anymore. Americans don't
want foreigners on their soil. Or at least everything looks that way from the
outside. Let them be that way.

~~~
geff82
As someone who just filled out their DS-160 visa application and paid money
for the application and now being left alone due to the new "travel ban" (wife
and mother in law Iranian) I just say: let this country be alone for a while.
I don't know when the US government (and the voters) will gain back
consciousness and be part of the international community again in a positive
way. Other countries are much more open right now: Germany, France, Canada...
and they even all have working Internet! And there is even no strong need to
reside in the US to do online business there, as the big platforms
(Appstores...) are open for most other countries.

~~~
geff82
I say those words as probably the biggest USA-fanboy one could imagine, the
guy who defended almost any obscure US policy. But right now, I can not do
this any more. I can live with the liberals, I can live with the
conservatives, but I can not live with aggressive political stupidness.

~~~
nojvek
Were at least stuck with this stupidity for 4 years. A financial crash is
probably due in that time.

------
kraftman
My guess would be that the US found some dodgy software that happened to make
use of cURL, add flagged him as part of it, given what he's previously said
about receiving emails from people that have found his details in other
software: [https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2016/11/14/i-have-toyota-
corola/](https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2016/11/14/i-have-toyota-corola/)

~~~
willvarfar
Except if that were so they'd just routinely stop him on arrival instead.
We've had countless stories of programmers being interviewed crossing borders
and offered deals. There was one on HN just last week about a programmer
tweeting about being approached, but I can't find that story.. but its their
MO.

Do-Not-Fly is for people they fear might blow up the plane before it arrives
in the US.

~~~
curiousgal
Wouldn't he not be given a visa in the first place if he was such a suspect?

~~~
thecopy
Swedes can get a visa waiver automatically within a few minutes online by
using an online form.

~~~
bonzini
ESTA is not entirely automatic. He could have been denied it; in fact, he
probably will be denied it the next time he tries to get the ESTA, if he ever
does. He will then have to go through the non-waiver visa procedure.

However, you only have to renew ESTA once every two years, not every time you
fly. The DHS might have "discovered" whatever they discovered only recently.

------
TekMol
My feeling is that I read stories like these pretty often. That somebody was
denied entry or arrested or humiliated while entering the USA. Is this because
it happens more often in the USA then in other countries? Or is there some
kind of reporting bias at play?

~~~
raverbashing
It's a bias (not sure how it's called, maybe a type of "survivor bias")

You don't hear about the thousands admitted without an issue in the US every
day. But of course those that aren't admitted show up here

May I also note some (tech people) display an increased level of naiveté in
dealing with border people.

~~~
icebraining
_You don 't hear about the thousands admitted without an issue in the US every
day. But of course those that aren't admitted show up here_

Yes, but that bias applies to every country, it doesn't justify the US bias of
these reports.

~~~
raverbashing
Correct, even a small percentage is indicative of an issue

------
baybal2
I was denied entry once, and I am a frequent flyer.

It was at Calgary's airport. I was called out for a search. Then, border
security guys spent an hour having coffee and my plane flew away. I came to
them and made them have a very unpleasant conversation with me for the next
hour.

They summoned their higher up, who came with an official entry refusal with no
reason stated, citing that he has no obligation to give one.

The bastard had a badge with name R. Torres on it.

Nevertheless, I flew the next day on the same airline.

------
qume
Just to balance the narrative here a bit, I have traveled into and out of the
US many times per year for around 15 years with no problems on an ESTA. I only
recently switched to a visa.

After a long flight having to deal with the delay and hassle of immigration
seems much worse than it is. I really hate it, and the comments here suggest
others do too, but if you look at what we have to deal with objectively it's
not really that horrible.

It feels weird for me to be defending them, because of the crappy experiences
over the years, but when it comes down to it I think CBP are far more
reasonable than they are given credit for because of the crappy environment it
happens in. If you were calmly asked the same questions by a sweet guy or girl
on a chaise longue while being offered champagne and strawberries, people
would have almost no problem even though it's really the same thing without
the elevated stress level.

Regarding Daniel - like others here I'm sure it's because cURL has been used
extensively for bad purposes he was kicked off the ESTA program. Yes it sucks
that they didn't let him know in advance, and they didn't have the smarts to
figure that he had nothing to do with the bad actors.

For me getting a visa was a pretty easy process. The interviewer in my country
was a smart political science graduate and everything went smoothly. An
inconvenience for sure, but hey this is another sovereign nation, why should
us foreigners expect to be able to march in without playing by their rules,
even if we don't agree with them.

Don't get me wrong - this situation sucks for Daniel and US immigration has
massive room for improvement.

~~~
GreaterFool
> cURL has been used extensively for bad purposes

What?! Sources please.

~~~
m-j-fox
I mean, I've personally used it to access APIs from shell scripts that would
have been far more maintainable in a proper Python script.

~~~
contingencies
That's three counts of conspiracy to degrade system maintainability,
manufacturing tooling with intent to degrade system maintainability,
possession of tooling to degrade system maintainability, one count of
international travel with intent to degrade system maintainability, two counts
of manufacture of false documents[0][1] in support of a conspiracy. Bail
denied. And... that's life.

[0] Exhibit A: _man curl_

[1] _CURL website_

------
caseysoftware
Considering the various "terrorist watch lists" are basically vaguely defined
names and anyone can get added trivially, without review, and without a way to
challenge[1], is anyone really surprised? When it's bad enough that a sitting
US Senator was stopped and interrogated because "T Kennedy" was on the
list[2], we passed that absurdity threshold a long time ago.

1 - [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-
lis...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-
list_n_5617599.html)

2 - [http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/no-fly-mistakes-
cat-s...](http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/no-fly-mistakes-cat-stevens-
ted-kennedy-john-lewis/index.html)

------
efoto
"Don't assume malice when stupidity is an adequate explanation."

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor)

~~~
gtirloni
My exact thoughts. The bureaucracy/machinery is so complex that it could have
been any minor error in the paperwork.

For a person, this is their worst day. For a huge bureaucracy, nothing.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Quite possible there's some Scandinavian criminal that happens to have the
same name, for example.

------
mrleiter
He himself says that he does not know the reason why. It could be because of
his involvement in cURL, it could be a mix-up, it could be any reason, really.
As long as there is no official statement or any other formal reason, this all
remains speculative and consequently unfit for solid arguments against the US
immigration policy in this specific case.

Disclaimer: I am a European citizen and by no means in favor of recent
immigration policy changes of the US.

------
GreaterFool
Recently EU parliament voted to introduce visas for US citizens due to unequal
treatment of EU countries. "About f __ _ing time ", I though. Few months pass
and I read that EU Commission will do _nothing*. I hate those bureaucrats in
the EU.

EU should retaliate (not of malice, just to force equal treatment). It's not a
visa waiver if you can be denied entry so easily, as many people are. And of
course not all EU countries are eligible.

~~~
jagermo
I understand your sentiment and the reaction.

But I think it would be wrong to have an eye-for-eye-approach. US Citizens
should see, how easy it can be to travel to a country, without jumping through
hoops like ESTA. They should feel wrong why they force it onto others but
enjoy the freedom to travel easily.

Otherwise nothing will change. It's easy to start a "oh, they do it to us,
let's annoy them even more" spiral and that would really, really suck.

~~~
mclightning
> "US Citizens should see, how easy it can be to travel to a country, without
> jumping through hoops like ESTA."

They have been seeing it all this time, yet this is what you get.

~~~
pas
Change takes time. It's a complex problem deeply rooted in fear, mongered by
people who now successfully occupied the White House.

In the mean time, I agree, probably a simpler yet more aggressive tit-for-tat
approach would be more fruitful.

~~~
GreaterFool
Nothing has been done about unequal treatment of EU countries in the past
decade. Don't you think this is long overdue?

For EU it should be a matter of principle and backbone. They simply don't have
them. EU has proven several times that they will look the other way as long as
it benefits larger members.

~~~
pas
Agreed.

I think the prime example of this is the common energy policy, that then
Germany regularly fucks up with the OPAL pipeline deals with Putin.

------
Capt-RogerOver
He seems to have tried to enter USA using ESTA. ESTA is not a visa, it's a
visa-waiver program. It's specifically created as an easier method of entering
a country, but as a trade-off, it says in the terms that they can deny it for
any reason with no questions. This does not mean that the person cannot enter
the country per se, it just means they need to apply for a real visa.

~~~
baby
I do not get your point. The ESTA is the only way to get to the country if
you're going to a conference or on holidays or to visit someone.

If you're looking for better, you need to find a job to sponsor you and you
need to go through the lottery (H1B). Or you need to work for a US company
abroad for more than a year (L1). Or you need to get married with an american
person.

~~~
gergles
You can absolutely get a B-1 or B-2 visa. Only VWP-eligible country citizens
are even eligible to get an ESTA in the first place.

[https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visitor.html](https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visitor.html)

You fill out a DS-160 and go through the process, but you don't _have_ to get
an ESTA. You are always allowed to apply for a full visa instead.

More succinctly, click the "May I apply for a visa instead of using the VWP?"
question on this page: [https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visa-
waiver-...](https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visa-waiver-
program.html)

~~~
baby
You can get a B-1 or B-2 visa if you're not on the list of countries eligible
for an ESTA.

------
rl3
There's a good chance that if automated software is at least partly
responsible for this, that cURL was probably used somewhere in the
intelligence pipeline. Rather ironic if that is the case.

~~~
HappyTypist
I should make a low level utility and in the license prohibit governments from
denying me entry.

~~~
tbodt
That clause of the license probably wouldn't hold up in court though.

------
thepoet
On a related note, the visa issuing system of the US sucks. I was denied a
tourist visa and then issued one on reapplication in a matter of 5 days. The
process is highly irregular since absolutely nothing changed between the two
30 seconds interviews except the interviewer. The only inconvenience was I had
to reschedule my YC interview and throw away an additional $300 in visa form
and travel cost.

------
eecc
Trouble is: to save face they'll just stonewall him indefinitely rather than
investigating, admitting a mistake and removing him from the list.

------
willvarfar
Its easy to speculate that if the feds wanted to speak to him on something
computer-related he'd be let travel to the US and interviewed on arrive.

The "Do Not Fly" list is usually for suspected terrorists.

Perhaps it was just a name-match? The wikipedia article
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List)
says:

> Many individuals were "caught in the system" as a result of sharing the
> exact or similar name of another person on the list

However, there are at least 82 "Daniel Stenberg"s in Sweden (and I'm surprised
its not considerably higher that that!)
[https://personer.eniro.se/resultat/Daniel%20Stenberg](https://personer.eniro.se/resultat/Daniel%20Stenberg)

~~~
loopbit
First of all, there's no reason to think that it's a "Do Not Fly" list. He
says that he did the US border control checks in his local airport. That is
quite common (at least in Europe) when flying to the US and just means that
they check your visa (or visa-waiver in this case) at home instead of after
physically getting to the US[0]

I live in Ireland and at almost every (all?) flight from Dublin to the US you
do the US border control check here to the point where they don't even check
your passport on arrival.

Second, there really is plenty of people with problems like that. A friend of
mine travels frequently to the US and his name is the same as a relatively
well known drug lord (it's a fairly common name, too). As far as I know, he's
never been denied entrance to the US, but he routinely gets flagged,
separated, his identity verified and his luggage checked. Usually, all it
means is that when he travels with colleagues or family, they have to wait for
him for an extra hour or two to get out of the airport.

[0] I think that, technically, the area of the local airport where they do
that is considered US soil and, for all legal purposes, you are in the US. As
I said, not sure about this and I might be completely wrong, but that's what
the signs lead me to think.

~~~
germanier
Sweden currently does not have any pre-clearance airports (which is what you
describe for Dublin). The check here was most likely only done by the airline
itself using a system supplied by the US authorities for checking ESTA
validity.

------
ckastner
What puzzles me is that the ESTA application was approved in the first place.
If they were going to deny him entry, why approve it?

Could there be a more benign explanation for this issue? For example: his ESTA
approval expired (it's valid for two years), or the data entered on the ESTA
form did not exactly match his passport data (special characters, middle
names, etc.)

~~~
ubernostrum
The online ESTA form does not "approve" someone to enter the US. The online
ESTA form is required to determine if you're in a population that's generally
eligible for visa-free entry (so that the airline and other systems know
whether to require a visa for you).

Filling out the ESTA form does not grant a visa, does not grant the right to
enter the US, and does not even guarantee you'll be allowed onto the plane. It
simply says "Yes, you appear to be a citizen of a country which, in general,
has visa-free entry to the US".

~~~
germanier
This is simply not true (I posted the exact message it shows you at the end of
the process somewhere else in this thread – it explicitly contains the phrase
"approved and authorized to travel").

Yes, it does not guarantee you entry. However, it does much more than just to
check whether you have a required nationality. If that were all, the system
weren't needed. Practically every country has visa-free entry for some
nationalities and such travel authorisation systems are very rare among them.
Airline know how to check if you have one of the visa-free nationalities and
do so every day everywhere in the world (probably much more reliable than
having the travel fill out a form, too – they even check again in the case of
the US, as we see in this example). The US introduced the ESTA system much
later than visa-free travel for certain nationalities.

~~~
ubernostrum
And as I said in my other reply to you: _the wording you are citing is
terrible and inaccurate and you should never, ever, ever, EVER, rely on it as
an exhaustive legally-binding declaration_.

~~~
germanier
This reply was not at all about the wording but about the fact that the system
does more than just checking whether "you appear to be a citizen of a country
which, in general, has visa-free entry to the US". If that were all, it would
be useless.

Unfortunately as a non-US citizen I have to rely on the system. The
alternative would be getting a B1/B2-visa but this doesn't change the fact
that I could still be denied entry. (Of course this is the same, I could be
denied entry to any non-EU country if they wish so.)

~~~
ubernostrum
Citizenship is the primary determinant of ESTA, because ESTA is the feeder of
the Visa Waiver Program which in turn is based entirely on citizenship.
Everything else in ESTA is largely just duplicating requirements that would be
imposed without ESTA (such as remaining validity of passport, whether you have
a return ticket, purpose of visit, etc.).

~~~
germanier
The Visa Waiver Program was in place before ESTA was introduced. Before that,
the airline took a look at your passport and then a list of allowed
nationalities. Having the traveller fill out an online form does not change
this requirement.

~~~
ubernostrum
ESTA is the system which determines eligibility for the Visa Waiver Program.
That is the sole and entire purpose of ESTA. That is why ESTA was created.
Your comment that VWP existed earlier is not a disproof of this and has zero
relevance. As such, your mention of that gives an extremely strong indication
that you do not in fact understand what it is you are arguing about.

ESTA's purpose is to determine eligibility for VWP. VWP is based on
citizenship of a participating country.

All other things asked for and evaluated by ESTA are things which any
traveler, entering via any legal means, can and usually will also be evaluated
on. For example, ESTA will usually verify that you have a passport which is
valid for at least six months beyond your scheduled date of departure from the
United States. This is not a unique requirement that ESTA, only ESTA, and
nothing else anywhere other than ESTA imposes. A minimum amount of remaining
passport validity is an incredibly common requirements, not just of the United
States but of practically every country in the world.

~~~
germanier
I feel like I am repeating myself. When ESTA was introduced, only a single
requirement was added: "You need to fill out that online form". Somehow, the
eligibility was determined before it was introduced. The things you list
(nationality, passport validity, ...) are all easily checked before boarding
by airlines. This happens everywhere in the world, for all kinds of
destinations. An online form is not a reliable way to determine your
citizenship anyway.

You seem to be unaware that even if you fulfil the formal requirements, ESTA
applications can and are being denied by the system (and are sometimes checked
by hand which can take a few days). This can have all kinds of reasons. I know
at least two persons that were denied their ESTA even though they ticked off
all the requirements. Both later got a B1/B2 visa without any trouble.

~~~
ubernostrum
Yes, somehow eligibility was determined before ESTA existed. Now ESTA exists,
and ESTA is the thing that determines eligibility.

I do not see how this is relevant in any way, or even what it is you are
trying to tell me I'm wrong about, because every time I tell you how the
system works you go running off to some irrelevant other thing. Please either
explain clearly what point you are trying to make, or stop.

~~~
germanier
This sounds like something Gogolian bureaucrats would say. "The purpose of
filling out form A38 is to have form A38 filled out." Modern bureaucracy
usually doesn't introduce requirements for the heck of it. Checking
citizenship worked fine before the introduction of ESTA so "checking
citizenship" was not the reason the system was introduced or is still in
place. It does that as well but that is not the _point_ of ESTA. This is all I
wanted to tell you.

~~~
ubernostrum
The fact that the visa waiver program existed earlier has absolutely no
relevance. Was there a way to check requirements prior to ESTA being created?
Yes. But _now_ , ESTA is the way requirements are checked for the visa waiver
program. That is the purpose for which ESTA exists and for which it was
created. That is ESTA's job. That is what ESTA does. ESTA is not some separate
data-gathering or visa-issuing system; its sole and entire purpose for
existing is to be the thing which, now -- and yes, once upon a time a system
existed for this which was not ESTA, but that is not relevant because now ESTA
is the thing which does this, because it is possible for one thing to replace
another thing -- checks requirements for the visa waiver program.

So, hopefully you will finally, for the love of all that is holy, agree that
ESTA is the thing which checks requirements for the visa waiver program. The
visa waiver program is tied ultimately to one, exactly one, and only one
thing: "Are you a citizen of a country designated as part of the Visa Waiver
Program? (Yes/No)".

Everything else is secondary to that. Everything else is details. Everything
else is bureaucratic requirements like checking how long it'll be until your
passport expires or looking for red flags like not having a return ticket, and
those things get checked on everybody, even people who are getting visas.
Meanwhile, _citizenship of a visa-waiver country is the sine qua non of the
visa waiver program and thus is the sine qua non of ESTA "approval" since
ESTA's sole purpose is to check the requirements of the visa waiver program_.

~~~
germanier
Usually if things are replaced for another there is a reason. If you arguments
are not your thing, I can only appeal to authority, namely the people that
created the system in the first place:

    
    
        The Conference agrees on the need for significant 
        security enhancements to the entire Visa Waiver Program as set 
        forth in the Senate bill and to the implementation of the 
        electronic travel authorization system prior to permitting the 
        Secretary to admit new countries under his new waiver 
        authority. The Conference mandates that the Secretary develop 
        such an electronic travel authorization system to collect 
        biographical and such other information from each prospective 
        Visa Waiver Program traveler necessary to determine whether the 
        alien is eligible to travel under the program and whether a law 
        enforcement or security risk exists in permitting the alien to 
        travel to the United States. The Conference believes the 
        Secretary should check the information collected in the 
        electronic travel authorization system against all appropriate 
        databases, including lost and stolen passport databases such as 
        that maintained by Interpol. The Conference believes that 
        checking travelers from Visa Waiver Program countries against 
        all appropriate watch lists and databases will greatly enhance 
        the overall security of the Visa Waiver Program.
    

[https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/110th-
congress...](https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/110th-
congress/house-report/259/1)

As you see, the main stated purpose is not the check citizenship but to query
various databases in advance.

(For completeness I want to add that nowadays "You haven't travelled to some
countries" is another requirement to use the VWP. The ESTA application also
asks for things visa applications do not, such as the names of your social
media accounts.)

~~~
ubernostrum
You are interpreting my statement as "there are literally no other questions
on the ESTA form other than citizenship and that's the only thing it looks
at". That is not what I said, and you need to stop assuming that's what I
said.

ESTA exists to check eligibility for the visa waiver program. The primary
criterion of the visa waiver program is... your citizenship. Everything else
is secondary. All that stuff in your big quote? It's stuff that the US wants
to check on _everybody_. The fact that ESTA checks it does not mean that ESTA
is suddenly not a gatekeeper for the visa waiver program, or that ESTA is
doing special extra checks above and beyond anything else, or that ESTA is
somehow secretly doing something other than visa-waiver eligibility. The fact
that ESTA checks it simply means that _everybody_ , including people eligible
for visa waiver, will get checked on those things. The difference between visa
waiver and non-visa-waiver is not whether those checks are done; it's what
country you're a citizen of. ESTA checks those other things because they have
to be checked no matter what, and doing them in the same form makes things
more efficient. Period.

~~~
germanier
I never claimed that citizenship is not the main criteria for the VWP. But
just because it is does not mean that everything that feeds into the VWP has
"citizenship" as a main purpose. If that were then nobody would have gone
through the trouble of creating ESTA. The checks that were in place before
were sufficient for that purpose. There were no complaints about that. You
can't just look at things in a vacuum as if there was no world before today.
Just because something on the surface has one main task does not mean it was
mainly created to perform that task.

The reason ESTA exists is, as you correctly note, that the US wants to do
certain checks on everybody, including VWP travellers. Before the introduction
of ESTA they could not easily do that. Now they can. The reason they ask for
citizenship on the same form is then done for efficiency (to check all the
main eligibility criteria as well).

The fact that ESTA collects data and later allowed to easily add additional
criteria for the VWP and to collect a fee, was certainly not unwelcome by the
creators (but this is not why it was designed).

Why have I even started to reply in the first place? Your original comment
states

\- "The online ESTA form is required to determine if you're in a population
that's generally eligible for visa-free entry (so that the airline and other
systems know whether to require a visa for you)." (it is not required to do
that as history before its introduction shows – there are alternatives to do
that just as effectively)

\- "It simply says 'Yes, you appear to be a citizen of a country which, in
general, has visa-free entry to the US'" (no, it states much more as evidenced
by the fact that countless of citizens of VWP nations get denied their ESTA
application)

------
vadym909
Sorry for your troubles. In many blue states that didn't vote Trump, our votes
are worth 25% of the votes of some red states. Not our fault- what was
implemented to make it fair to small states is now a menace to the large
states. Demagogues that cater to the GOP agenda manipulate the red-state
populace like 3rd world dictators.

Our only hope is for the next Dem Presidential candidate to be sensible but
also capable of charming or hoodwinking the red states in some way. I thought
Bernie would be good, but he's too honest. We need someone like Bill Clinton
again.

~~~
baby
Oh this has been going on before Trump took leadership.

------
Sir_Substance
Stop traveling to the US people. They treat you like shit, and they're gonna
keep treating you like shit until they start losing money.

Arrange these conferences somewhere else.

------
ajeet_dhaliwal
The no explanation is the worst part for anything like this. Impossible to
determine what to do or what reason they had, just denied. It's not just the
government either, look at how some tech companies have a policy of providing
no explanation for interview rejections too. It's a lack of respect for anyone
but oneself.

~~~
nothrabannosir
_> no explanation for interview rejections too. It's a lack of respect for
anyone but oneself._

Nothing personal Ajeet, but: for the love of God, can this trope _please_ die?
It has been widely, extensively, repeatedly, incessantly established every
single time this comes up: they do it because of the unreasonably high risk of
being sued. If the cards are stacked against you, the wisest move is not to
play. This has nothing to do with respect. It is the logical move in an unfair
game.

Otherwise I agree with your post. Even that the frustration must feel similar
to silent job interview rejection. I'm just getting tired of seeing this "no
respect" point over and over and over and over here. My eyes are bleeding.

Sorry for the expletive.

~~~
ajeet_dhaliwal
Not personal at all, I don't for the most part need to participate in the
'game' anymore thankfully, but I still think in specific situations, perhaps a
junior dev failing a technical white board interview, if they ask for feedback
it should be given, otherwise they have no way of knowing what went wrong or
how to improve. It takes five minutes. Being afraid of being sued is a lame
excuse. I know 15 years ago it would have accelerated my career, nowadays it
doesn't matter.

Don't you think Daniel Stenberg should have a way of determining on what
grounds he was denied and what he can do about it?

~~~
nothrabannosir
Yes for Daniel, no for companies. Either we protect them (at least slightly)
more from lawsuits, OR we accept their silence. I honestly don't mind which.
But it's one or the other. We make the rules, as people.

------
benmarks
Denied before boarding? I'd first level blame at the airline / CBP connection,
rather than a DNF entry or change to ESTA status. Curious to hear what
happens.

Ironic, as someone pointed out on Twitter, that likely cURL is probably used
somewhere in the chain of communication!

~~~
vbezhenar
I wrote some software for police at some moment. Years later I was visiting
police station and I saw them using my software to check me. It was
interesting experience.

~~~
mrisoli
I worked on a state government transparency project once. It lists everything
the government spends money on, including the companies they contract to do
things, it was interesting seeing how much the company was making from that
project and how much I was getting paid.

------
0x0
Would it be possible to change the license of cURL to one that denies usage
inside the US? :P

~~~
fnj
If you have control of the copyright, yes, you _could_ change the license from
straight GPL to any kind of customized license you want. I guess you _could_
restrict access to any group you want. But if it's open source, it would be
pretty difficult to enforce your policy.

Even if you closed the source, ruining it for linux, what good would that do?
The cat is out of the bag already. Anybody could just use the existing open
source and fork it further as they wish.

~~~
jordigh
> But if it's open source, it would be pretty difficult to enforce your
> policy.

So, two things: (1) a license that discriminates against a particular group is
not open source, (2) being open source or not has nothing to do with whether
enforcing the license will be difficult. Enforcing the license is just a
matter of the resources available to the copyright holders. Many proprietary
licenses are routinely violated, some free and open source licenses have been
enforced.

------
ubernostrum
Just to throw out an anecdote: a while back I nearly was denied boarding of an
international flight, because it turned out the airline had mixed up my
passport data and decided I was not a US citizen and would need a visa to
return to the United States.

I discovered this at the airport, when trying to drop off my bag. Fortunately,
the airline agent was able to get a supervisor who took a look at my (US
citizen) passport and fixed something in their records that allowed me to get
a boarding pass and catch the flight, but I could easily have just been
stranded there by someone who took the attitude of "computer says no, can't
help you when the computer says no".

~~~
baby
Oh my, I was denied as well last time I entered because the person at the
border looked at the wrong page on my passport (which was a Visa for the
previous year). She just told me she couldn't let me in without any fucking
reason. I realized she was looking at the wrong page and had to tell her to
look at the correct one. She gave me her best "I don't give a fuck" impression
and let me go on my way.

------
mettamage
Are there people here who have worked at airport security of some country? I
know we don't have much to go on, so I'm not looking for the truth. I'm
wondering hypothetically: why / how could his entry be denied?

~~~
the_mitsuhiko
I don't work at airport security but since he was denied on check-in I suppose
it's a case of "computer says no". The person at the check-in counter does not
know why and has no way to get the situation remedied.

------
pavlakoos
At least it happened before the flight...

------
daveheq
The link says I'm unauthorized to view the tweets, whatever that means.

------
mariuolo
I bet it's the "haxx" domain.

------
op00to
Please don't say "Americans" don't want foreigners on our soil. A minority of
Americans allowed a hostile foreign government to manipulate our election
process to raise a corrupt, compromised bigot to power. Most Americans want
our country to be open and free. Painting every American this way does nothing
to recognize the misery of this situation.

~~~
svantana
Well things were not much better under Obama. In the last ten years, I've had
European friends denied entry, or even detained for hours on end, for the most
innocuous of reasons. And regardless of what "most Americans" want, they
clearly don't want it enough to make it a mainstream political issue.

~~~
pizza
Yup.

\- W brought us the magnificent theatre of Homeland Security

\- Clinton cut legal immigration by nearly half

\- Reagan made employers "attest to their immigration status", and a crime to
hire undocumented people knowingly

------
chinathrow
That's most likely because of some name collision/similarity instead of his
FOSS work.

~~~
stephenr
Quite possibly, but if so this is a weird result.

I was denied automatic (i.e. scan passport, go through automated face
detection machine) entry into Australia (my own country) a few years ago (at
the Australian end). When i asked the border security officer why it didn't
admit me, she said "you have a name similar to someone on a watch list". "Oh,
I didn't think my name was that common, is it a close match?" "Not that close,
no".

------
slitaz
Is he developing any critical software that some would want to inject unsafe
code?

~~~
VonGallifrey
By critical software, do you also mean software that is embedded into all
kinds of other software projects all over the world? Like cURL for example?

------
darkkindness
Sorry, I am not following the news, much. What is the context here?

~~~
Santosh83
Seems like no reason was given.

------
theboywho
People suggesting to move conferences to other countries like France or
Germany are wrong: you can't guarantee that your country is not going to turn
into a US-like isolationist in the future. The US wasn't and your country is
also only 1-government away from being one.

What we probably need is a new form of portable conferences where the location
doesn't matter and/or is flexible and/or regime-proof. We should stop taking
democracy and openness for granted.

~~~
K2L8M11N2
>you can't guarantee that your country is not going to turn into a US-like
isolationist in the future

If it does, you can move the conference again. Just because it can change
sometime "in the future" doesn't mean we shouldn't do it now.

~~~
theboywho
I was referring to suggestions of EU as a final solution to the US issue. What
you are referring to is to decide on hosting locations on a year to year
basis, which joins my idea of portable conferences.

------
MotokoCMDR
Absolutely no trouble at US airports. YMMV. Staff at JFK were professional,
friendly and fast.

This person may not have realized an ESTA needed in advance. He could be doing
the thing people often do where they screw something up, and then,
irresponsibly give a vague explanation, that they can deny later, but that
leaves open to interpretation the possibility that they were somehow unfairly
treated, when it might have just been their screw up.

"Denied because of ESTA" \--> could actually be "Denied because I didn't get
my ESTA ahead of time, and follow the clearly stated requirements. Damn, I'm
stupid. Everyone make sure you read the rules before you fly! My bad."

~~~
justin_vanw
Yes, these inflammatory stories surface on here from time to time. Everyone
jumps from 'someone was inconvenienced' to 'totalitarianism' in 1 second with
0 information. People start calling for boycotts of the US.

Later, 9 times out of 10 it ends up being nothing, but there's not a story
with thousands of posts with people saying 'oh, I jumped to conclusions'. In
fact people don't ever hear about the resolution, and they probably don't care
to hear stories that contradict the worldview they choose to reinforce for
themselves.

~~~
MotokoCMDR
True. People love to play at being victims of something. They absolutely love
a ripper of a story of some absolute bad villain. Even if none exists. It's
amazing the fictions that masquerade as truths, while everyone is out
pretending they've got a monopoly on facts. I'd laugh if it wasn't so
devastatingly sad. I'm still laughing tho. Maybe the internet
virtualizes/fictionalizes everything and we're all just "victims" of our own
creation. Frankennet.

