Before Entering US, Travelers May Have To Provide Their Social Media Passwords, Suggests DHS Head

[SaladFingers]

So you guys really think that some kind of a secretary will take the account details, log in, then browse through facebook pages? Is this world governed by teenagers?

 

If they require/need your permission to check on your facebook account, they will get it and then call up facebook and take everything from them.

[TidaLWaveZ]

The US administration already has full internet footprints of all it's citizens so it's not discrimination collecting the information of people that enter the country.

 

It does seem strange that they are targeting social media passwords though.

 

 

[79wjd]

5 minutes ago, Michael McAllister said:

I just don't understand the need for the passwords.  Social media accounts are typically public.  They could easily look up the information.

Deleted posts, private messages, etc... 

5 minutes ago, arbellason55 said:

We shouldn't be worried about the stupid ones, it's the ones that are mostly intelligent that we should be worried about. (feels odd saying a terrorist can be intelligent)  

You should be worried about both. But some of the terror attacks that have been successful have been committed by people who have shown questionable activity on social media (most terror attacks are committed by people who various governments are already watching -- a sad statement right there).

 

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Unless, you know, it violates the human rights convention.

What rights does that violate? Courts have already decided that CBP can search whoever they want without suspicion -- completely against the fourth amendment. And that's not just limited to US customs either -- Canada, the UK, and Australia all have similar policies, just to name a few. 

[Blade of Grass]

9 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Border patrol can already ask you anything they want. 

 

That's not true, they cannot make you reveal passwords. 

 

In re Grand Jury Subpoena to Sebastien Boucher, 2:06-mj-91, 2007 WL 4246473 (D. Vt. Nov. 29, 2007), appeal sustained by 2009 WL 424718 (D. Vt. Feb. 29, 2009)

United States v. Rogozin, 09-CR-379, 2010 WL 4628520 at **5-6 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2010)

United States v. Kirschner, No. 09-MC-50872, 2010 WL 1257355 (E.D. Mich. March 30, 2010).

 

Cases courtesy of the EFF

[Guest Kloaked]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

Unless, you know, it violates the human rights convention.

This is a tricky road to go down due to terrorist groups, people with terrorist affiliation, general criminals, cartels, etc, when they don't follow any rules. At what point do you say Okay, we need to start doing more thorough checks on everyone to help in keeping the peace as opposed to Everyone has the right to privacy, exclusion from arbitrary detainment, <etc etc>?

 

It's a sucky thing to put on everyone but what do you value more?

[79wjd]

5 minutes ago, SaladFingers said:

So you guys really think that some kind of a secretary will take the account details, log in, then browse through facebook pages? Is this world governed by teenagers?

 

If they require/need your permission to check on your facebook account, they will get it and then call up facebook and take everything from them.

And that is in violation of the fourth amendment. Sure, the NSA can do that, but then again, the CIA might also just have you killed...

[Sauron]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

What rights does that violate? Courts have already decided that CBP can search whoever they want without suspicion -- completely against the fourth amendment. And that's not just limited to US customs either -- Canada, the UK, and Australia all have similar policies, just to name a few. 

I wasn't referring to this in particular but to the claim they can have you do ANYTHING if you choose to enter the us.

[SaladFingers]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

And that is in violation of the fourth amendment. Sure, the NSA might do that, but then again, the CIA might also just have you killed...

 

 

Point being, they are getting your permission to do so. Just like asking for your password, they simply ask for your permission to get your data. Nobody will go through the UI of some dude's website. That's simply not how things work... That's how a child would do it.

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, SaladFingers said:

Point being, they are getting your permission to do so. Just like asking for your password, they simply ask for your permission to get your data. Nobody will go through the UI of some dude's website. That's simply not how things work... That's how a child would do it.

Is your argument that it would set a precedent for them to do more things?

[knightslugger]

Historically, terrorist attackers in the US have had a history of linked terrorist organizations or extremist rhetoric and or images on their social media accounts. Always found after the attack was carried out...

 

had we but known before hand... San Bernardino would have never happened.

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

Historically, terrorist attackers in the US have had a history of linked terrorist organizations or extremist rhetoric and or images on their social media accounts. Always found after the attack was carried out...

 

had we but known before hand... San Bernardino would have never happened.

Had we known before hand.....nothing would have probably changed. A lot of terrorist attacks are committed by individuals who are already on a government watch list. It's good to use sources like this to help build up a watch list, but governments need to keep closer tabs on those people.

[steffen_anywhere]

35 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

As I said above, your actions on social media are often a very good indication of your views on certain hot topics and what you may be involved in. A lot of the attacks (terrorist and normal criminal activities) that occur worldwide are often mentioned/discussed on social media before they even happen. Of course, this only applies to people who are active on social media.

Right, that's absolutely true, all I'm saying is that there should be a universal method of doing this, where social media networks have to grant access to private messages for this special purpose. You'd have to request this prior to your entry into the given country, or you'd accept this practice with the Terms & Conditions of Usage when signing up. Same as how financial institutions have to provide certain information.

[SaladFingers]

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

Is your argument that it would set a precedent for them to do more things?

No, my arguments are two mainly:

 

1) The very practice of "asking for passwords" sounds very unprofessional and really so unrealistic based on how technology works that it sounds like it's either thought of a teenager or someone really technology illiterate.

 

2) Making it a requirement is pretty moot since not everyone is using said website, or they use it with fake credentials. So it's widely unfair to people that chose to use it over the people that don't. And one could easily just deny having anything to do with a profile that seems to be his/her in the first place, as there isn't any official check when creating an account. It's a website anyone can do whatever they want with.

[AresKrieger]

Jokes on you I don't have a social media account

 

Also couldn't they just look at the account's activity rather than getting the password?

[knightslugger]

2 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Jokes on you I don't have a social media account

well if you ain't got one, you ain't got one. Plenty of other metrics exist to adequately identify your motivations.

[Guest Kloaked]

8 minutes ago, SaladFingers said:

1) The very practice of "asking for passwords" sounds very unprofessional and really so unrealistic based on how technology works that it sounds like it's either thought of a teenager or someone really technology illiterate.

I can agree with that.

 

8 minutes ago, SaladFingers said:

2) Making it a requirement is pretty moot since not everyone is using said website, or they use it with fake credentials. So it's widely unfair to people that chose to use it over the people that don't. And one could easily just deny having anything to do with a profile that seems to be his/her in the first place, as there isn't any official check when creating an account. It's a website anyone can do whatever they want with.

Requiring someone to have a social media account is dumb, yes. You also bring up a good point that reminds me of fake accounts.

 

7 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Jokes on you I don't have a social media account

We're on a social media website right now.

 

Unless you're making a joke. In that case: test post pls ignore

[knightslugger]

5 minutes ago, SaladFingers said:

No, my arguments are two mainly:

 

1) The very practice of "asking for passwords" sounds very unprofessional and really so unrealistic based on how technology works that it sounds like it's either thought of a teenager or someone really technology illiterate.

 

2) Making it a requirement is pretty moot since not everyone is using said website, or they use it with fake credentials. So it's widely unfair to people that chose to use it over the people that don't. And one could easily just deny having anything to do with a profile that seems to be his/her in the first place, as there isn't any official check when creating an account. It's a website anyone can do whatever they want with.

1: How is it unprofessional? It is the absolute fastest way to gain access.

 

2: as i said, if you ain't got one, you aint got one. The requirement is to forfeit passwords for social media accounts YOU MAY HAVE.

[beaker]

Oh Geez, you travel to another country you give up the rights given to you by your country, you give up your privacy.   Even going into the US or Canada.  Don't want us to look at your phone or laptop, cool you will be on the next flight home or turn your car around see you later.

 

  

[AresKrieger]

5 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

 

We're on a social media website right now.

 

1) its a tech forum, not some standard share your life website like Twitter or facebook (and yes it was a joke)

2) The US government likely doesn't know this site exists

3) My name and actual email are not linked to this account

[SaladFingers]

2 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

1: How is it unprofessional? It is the absolute fastest way to gain access.

 

2: as i said, if you ain't got one, you aint got one. The requirement is to forfeit passwords for social media accounts YOU MAY HAVE.

1) Not really, requiring someone to physically browse a website and click through its menus is cumbersome and now the way it works. Handing a list of names to facebook and requiring open access to their database is much more efficient.

 

2) Well then, anyone can deny having an account, right? So the ones that do end up giving up their info are "played for fools". Exactly why making it a requirement is absurd. It's one thing to say "we will dig facebook for your publicly available stuff" like employers do and another to actually demand their account details or access to it.

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, AresKrieger said:

1) its a tech forum, not some standard share your life website like Twitter or facebook

2) The US government likely doesn't know this site exists

3) My name and actual email are not linked to this account

Your IP address is logged to this website and whatever other online application you use though.

[AresKrieger]

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

Your IP address is logged to this website and whatever other online application you use though.

Yeah except I don't actually live in NJ or Kansas, looking at this accounts ip address log is rather pointless

[knightslugger]

1 minute ago, SaladFingers said:

1) Not really, requiring someone to physically browse a website and click through its menus is cumbersome and now the way it works. Handing a list of names to facebook and requiring open access to their database is much more efficient.

 

2) Well then, anyone can deny having an account, right? So the ones that do end up giving up their info are "played for fools". Exactly why making it a requirement is absurd. It's one thing to say "we will dig facebook for your publicly available stuff" like employers do and another to actually demand their account details or access to it.

1) since it's on an application, a username and password will suffice. It also gives legal permission to the US Government to access said account.

 

2) Fraudulently submitting an immigration request can AND SHOULD result in immediate deportation.

[SaladFingers]

21 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

1) since it's on an application, a username and password will suffice. It also gives legal permission to the US Government to access said account.

 

2) Fraudulently submitting an immigration request can AND SHOULD result in immediate deportation.

Yes, they only need the permission. Nobody is going to physically log in to any third party platform made by some dude on his basement.

 

What is fraudulent about it? Since facebook is nothing official, how can they prove anything? I can impersonate you and create a profile with your name. How can anyone tell? How can anyone prove that my profile is indeed my profile? It's not my tax number, it's not my ID number, it's not my house address, it's simply an account on someone's website. It's thin air. You can't *require* it. If they want to look it up as means of background checking then it is on them, but it's plain silly to make it a "law".

[mach]

Just encrypt everything you have and tell them you can't remember anything. Unless they have some alien technology that scan brains and hypnotize EVERY travellers to know their passwords, or prisonate and beat up everyone for it. If that is the case then AVOID this country.