Uh wow. Last time I traveled outside of Europe, it was still pretty safe. Seems one good option would be to make a cloud backup, wipe the phone before the flight and restore everything using the first hotel wifi. I wonder if creating a second (empty) user account on the phone and unlocking that one at the border is enough to comply with the law.
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
42 points (100.0% liked)
Privacy
1811 readers
64 users here now
Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.
Rules
PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!
- Be civil and no prejudice
- Don't promote big-tech software
- No reposting of news that was already posted
- No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
- No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)
Related communities:
Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
Another consideration is what happens on the other side of the journey. Canada, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand, which all share intelligence with the U.S. government under the Five Eyes program, have different border privacy policies. Under Australian law, travelers do not have to unlock their phones. Canadian authorities, like U.S. authorities, say they will seize a phone if a traveler refuses to unlock it. New Zealand imposes a $5,000 fine for failing to unlock a phone, and Britain considers refusing to unlock a phone for police to be a counterterrorism offense.
Quite insane. Seems like the only real answer is a burner phone.
The real answer is not travelling there ever again.
Make sure you've got a lock screen not based on biometrics and hand them your phone. They can't compel you to open it.
They can, however, refuse entry.
And just steal your phone!
Not to a US citizen.
For others, may as well bring a phone that's specific for traveling that doesn't have anything on it. Maybe even a dumb phone.
Article has more useful info.
Even assuming they recognize you citizenship and doesn't outright try to (unlawfully) deport you, they could still seize your belongings, detain you for 48 hours, and potentially add you on a no-fly list. The executive branch actually has the authority to do those things, its just that past administrations weren't this insane.
Better to just get a burner phone for traveling.
I'm so old, I remember a time when people left home without a phone at all.
Not to a US citizen.
Good luck arguing THAT point from the El Salvador concentration camp.
That's a separate problem, as far as I'm aware.
Technically it is separate, but I would suggest it is very related.
Due process is not getting provided to deportees. We already know for a fact one of the people sent shouldn't have been, and no attempts to rectify the issue are being made.
The message that was being sent even before that, but more so now, seems clear to me. That message is that anyone can be disappeared, for any reason, and it doesn't matter if the person in question did anything wrong.
That's why I was suggesting poking this particular badger is unwise, citizen or not.
I guess the narrative is that the US (the most powerful country in the world) cannot compel El Salvador (the country they are paying) to release the prisoners they sent there.
In other news, up is down