Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 27 2016, @07:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the I-don't-have-a-social-media-presence dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

The US Customs and Border Protection agency has submitted a request to the Office of Management and Budget, asking for permission to collect travelers social media account names as they enter the country.

The CBP, which is part of the US Department of Homeland Security, proposes that the request "Please enter information associated with your online presence — Provider/Platform — Social media identifier" be added to the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) and to the CBP Form I-94W (Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/Departure).

“It will be an optional data field to request social media identifiers to be used for vetting purposes, as well as applicant contact information,” the CBP noted.

“Collecting social media data will enhance the existing investigative process and provide DHS greater clarity and visibility to possible nefarious activity and connections by providing an additional tool set which analysts and investigators may use to better analyze and investigate the case.”

The public and affected agencies are asked to comment on the request within 60 days of its publication (i.e until August 22, 2016), but haven’t offered an online form for comments to be submitted. Instead, the commenters are asked to write them down and send them via snail mail to this address.

Source: https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2016/06/27/us-customs-social-media-account-names/


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday June 27 2016, @08:01PM

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 27 2016, @08:01PM (#366592) Journal

    Really hard actually. It certainly doesn't take 5 seconds and a bullshit email address.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Monday June 27 2016, @08:11PM

      by frojack (1554) on Monday June 27 2016, @08:11PM (#366595) Journal

      Oh, but lying on a federal document can get you arrested. Leaving it blank, not so much, until next year when its quietly made compulsory.

      However it appears this form isn't even used except at drive-in or walk-in border crossings, and only for Foreign visitors to the U.S:

      Arrival/Departure Forms: I-94 and I-94W
      Foreign visitors to the U.S. arriving via air or sea no longer need to complete paper Customs and Border Protection Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record or Form I-94W Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/Departure Record. Those who need to prove their legal-visitor status—to employers, schools/universities or government agencies—can access their CBP arrival/departure record information online.

      CBP now gathers travelers’ arrival/departure information automatically from their electronic travel records. Because advance information is only transmitted for air and sea travelers, CBP will still issue a paper form I-94 at land border ports of entry.

      https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/i-94-instructions [cbp.gov]

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:25PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:25PM (#366600)

        Only foreigners? That's all right, then.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Monday June 27 2016, @08:38PM

          by frojack (1554) on Monday June 27 2016, @08:38PM (#366607) Journal

          Only foreigners? That's all right, then.

          Pretty sure you were going for sarcasm or humor, but you accidentally hit the nail on the head.

          It is in fact "all right" or at least internationally recognized that you don't have any automatic right to enter a foreign country, and that country has a right to specify conditions of entry.

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
          • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:52PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:52PM (#366619)

            Oh may indeed be perfectly legal. And when other countries retaliate against American travellers, that too may be perfectly legal.

            • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday June 27 2016, @11:03PM

              by frojack (1554) on Monday June 27 2016, @11:03PM (#366665) Journal

              And when other countries retaliate against American travellers, that too may be perfectly legal.

              I'm out of mod points for today. Maybe I'll come back tomorrow and mod you insightful.

              --
              No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Dunbal on Monday June 27 2016, @08:40PM

        by Dunbal (3515) on Monday June 27 2016, @08:40PM (#366608)

        until next year when its quietly made compulsory.

        And it takes all of 10 seconds to make a dummy social media account. Not lying on a federal form - the account exists, is real and belongs to me. Thing is though, I never use THAT account...

        Seriously this is another FUCKING STUPID idea from FUCKING STUPID bureaucrats, it does absolutely NOTHING while generating paperwork, jobs and expenses for more people to leech off the taxpayer's already dry teat. Sure, THIS new initiative will "win the war on terror and drugs". Funny how money laundering, terrorism, crime, drugs, etc only seems to continue or increase despite ever restrictive legislation and ever increasing budgets.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by Nerdfest on Monday June 27 2016, @10:26PM

          by Nerdfest (80) on Monday June 27 2016, @10:26PM (#366650)

          It is however, another step towards a police state.

        • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:53AM

          by deimtee (3272) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:53AM (#366715) Journal

          Pretty sure that if you do that, the courts would still consider it lying to the .gov. They look at intent as well, and making a dummy account to give those details on the form would prove intent to deceive. I bet there is some vague wording about "all accounts" that makes it lying if you only give them some of them.

          You might not get caught, but I wouldn't bet on them not already knowing your accounts, and putting something different on there would be a big red flag.
          In fact that may be the main purpose - not to check out the bullshit you generally post on the interwebs, but to flag those people suspicious enough to lie about their accounts.

          --
          If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
          • (Score: 2) by tonyPick on Tuesday June 28 2016, @06:46AM

            by tonyPick (1237) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @06:46AM (#366894) Homepage Journal

            Yeah - this is similar to the old Visa Waiver Form questions you (used?) to have to fill out to enter the US, where they asked you if were a war criminal, known international terrorist or drug dealer etc. all in a handy yes/no tickbox form. Mainly you spent a moment trying to figure out what Moral Turpitude actually was, then just ticked no for all of them.

            However lying on the application is considered an offence in itself - they don't have to prove anything else about why you entered the US, or any crimes you commit while you're there. They can arrest, detain and/or deport you on the strength of this alone.

            I heard it described as the international traveller version of getting Al Capone for Tax Evasion; they might really want you for something else, but if you lie here then this is easier to prove and you've just handed an "Arrest me whenever you like" ticket to US law enforcement.

          • (Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday June 28 2016, @11:44AM

            by legont (4179) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @11:44AM (#366993)

            Also, underusing the said account will be a big red flag. See, we only want foreign visitors who love the US while openly and creatively write about it on their social media accounts. Visa application robot can easily check how many times a favourable comment about the US president is entered and make a qualified decision.

            --
            "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Francis on Monday June 27 2016, @09:42PM

        by Francis (5544) on Monday June 27 2016, @09:42PM (#366635)

        I suspect that it'll wind up being specific to FB and Twitter. I don't have either one, but I can't imagine that DHS is going to make a form that's big enough to list every forum that you might have registered with at some time and every email address. Chances are that even if it's restricted to things that people are using now, that it would probably make the form too large for the intended purpose.

        It would probably be better to just require people to list social media accounts that they use for terroristic activities. Save us all the work.

      • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday June 28 2016, @05:08AM

        by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @05:08AM (#366838) Homepage

        And like someone coming here to commit nefarious deeds wouldn't have the sense to set up a second "innocent" account to hand over to snoopy feds??

        --
        And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:14PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:14PM (#366596)

    And I would like to put my finger in US Custom officers' butt.
    If they let me get what I want, I pinky promise, I will give my social media name.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @11:53PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @11:53PM (#366687)

      Oil Check!

  • (Score: 2) by Dunbal on Monday June 27 2016, @08:36PM

    by Dunbal (3515) on Monday June 27 2016, @08:36PM (#366606)

    Sorry officer, I have no social media account.

    NEXT.

    Wait what, they're going to OBLIGE you to sign up to facebook next?

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by frojack on Monday June 27 2016, @08:40PM

      by frojack (1554) on Monday June 27 2016, @08:40PM (#366609) Journal

      Just as long as they don't force us to sign into SoylentNews. Nobody should EVER be forced to sign into SoylentNews. *cough*.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:47PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:47PM (#366616)

        Too right! I'll never sign in!

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:56AM

        by TheGratefulNet (659) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:56AM (#366716)

        I'll give them my chumyum account.

        (they don't need to know that that's not a real website. they're idiots, afterall.)

        on a serious note, this is 'building'. building a structure, step by step. otherwise known as slippery slope. first ask and make it optional, then you know the drill.

        at some point, I fully expect user/pass info to be requested.

        how long will it take before we get there? don't know, but we are headed there. if they ask for a username, they WILL ask for your password eventually. 100% chance of that; just a matter of when.

        this is why we all have to say 'no' to this at every turn.

        and its also why I won't ever have a FB or other social account. no account, nothing to give them.

        I am lucky that I saw the slippery slope and the chilling effect before I fell prey to it. but that's just me; most people fell for the line about social media being 'for them'. too bad people are so gullible and are ready to join nearly anything if you give them a Shiney(tm) in return.

        --
        "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
        • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Tuesday June 28 2016, @01:30AM

          by deimtee (3272) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @01:30AM (#366737) Journal

          They won't ask for a password for facebook or google or linkedin or any US based site. They already have access to everything on there.
          (The official story might be they only look at what you make public, but they will be able to see everything.)

          I also believe there will be an automatic crosslink to your TIA file's list of accounts, and lying about or omitting accounts will trigger "enhanced security".

          --
          If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
    • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday June 27 2016, @09:00PM

      by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Monday June 27 2016, @09:00PM (#366623) Journal

      Why not. Imagine it! Each state could set up a “social network marketplace.” Then we could fine^Wtax anybody who hasn't signed up for a social network!

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by dyingtolive on Monday June 27 2016, @11:42PM

      by dyingtolive (952) on Monday June 27 2016, @11:42PM (#366679)

      That's kind of what I've been getting increasingly worried about, given all the HR drones that already try to strong-arm for that info.

      I don't look forward to the era when I have to set up a token facebook account with just enough friends and activity to pass muster in the eyes of some bureaucrats.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 28 2016, @06:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 28 2016, @06:36PM (#367206)

      Wait what, they're going to OBLIGE you to sign up to facebook next?

      Isn't this an opportunity for the next big social media wannabe?

      Just make it really easy to sign up. Maybe put some ads near the relevant areas. You'd have 15 billion users soon and be bought up by Microsoft or whoever for billions.

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:44PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @08:44PM (#366613)

    Does al Qaeda have its own social media platform, or do they just use Google Plus?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 28 2016, @08:57AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 28 2016, @08:57AM (#366948)

      Does it count as social media if noone's there?

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by richtopia on Monday June 27 2016, @08:52PM

    by richtopia (3160) on Monday June 27 2016, @08:52PM (#366620) Homepage Journal

    Disclaimer: I don't have friends or family, so my only social network account is SoylentNews.

    When I bought a house this spring, my realtor could not contact the HOA president. It was only after she looked up my HOA on Facebook that she received a reply the next day. When entering the country, you need to give a method of contact. If you don't have a local mobile and are living in a hotel social media may be one of the most reliable methods of communication.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by moondoctor on Monday June 27 2016, @09:39PM

    by moondoctor (2963) on Monday June 27 2016, @09:39PM (#366632)

    Vaguely confusing headline/summary, seemed like they are asking for the power to demand this info. I reread the summary (the *whole* thing this time!) and noticed that they are asking for permission to ask for permission 'to collect travellers social media account names as they enter the country.'

    Either way it's still nuts. A new govt database of highly detailed personal info? Running out of ways to say "Orwellian' and 'what could possibly go wrong' these days...

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by CirclesInSand on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:29AM

      by CirclesInSand (2899) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:29AM (#366708)

      Should still be denied to them though. First it will be optional, then refusal will be grounds for suspicion and warrants and general harassment, then it will be a requirement (but they will find some way to retain the harassment). Best to just say "no" from the start.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Leebert on Tuesday June 28 2016, @01:06AM

      by Leebert (3511) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @01:06AM (#366720)

      If you're not familiar with the Paperwork Reduction Act, it basically says that if you are collecting information from the general public, the form (virtual or physical) must be reviewed and approved by OMB. If it's not, the government agency cannot *require* you to provide the information. In general, if you ever come across a form for a federal government agency and it doesn't have an OMB control number, you can refuse to fill it out and you cannot be penalized.

      Sounds fantastic, but it has its headaches for government personnel. For instance, we've put up simple RSVP web forms for events which have required a whole bunch of hassle to get an OMB control number. Why? Because aside from entering basic identifying information (name and address are exempt), they're clicking a radio button to indicate whether they're attending the event virtually, or in person. Literally, a radio button is considered an information collection "burden", which requires permission from OMB (and must be published in the Federal register). Then you get into splitting hairs: "If we put TWO form submit buttons, one for in-person and one for virtual, is that now exempt?" Yeah, we waste time on this stuff.

      Anyway, that's why they need to ask for permission to collect the information. Not because it's a stupid idea (which it is), but because OMB is required to ensure that it doesn't overburden the public.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @09:49PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @09:49PM (#366637)

    Seems like the smart bad guys will not tell the truth.
    Which would just make this another useless inconvenience for ordinary folks.

    It does make sense if their threat model is really dumb bad guys,
    but I'd really hate to have to testify before Congress with that plan.

    • (Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday June 27 2016, @10:43PM

      by MostCynical (2589) on Monday June 27 2016, @10:43PM (#366659) Journal

      But the only ones tey catch seem to be thereally dumb ones.
      And.. as long as they can show the caught *someone* was was going to do *something*, then it was all worth it, right? Now give us another billion for next year's budget.

      --
      "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by MadTinfoilHatter on Tuesday June 28 2016, @03:54AM

      by MadTinfoilHatter (4635) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @03:54AM (#366820)

      Seems like the smart guys will not tell the truth.

      FTFY. If you assume that the only reason to not give them this information is that you're somehow "bad", you're already playing into their hands.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @10:06PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2016, @10:06PM (#366642)
    • (Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday June 28 2016, @05:27AM

      by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Tuesday June 28 2016, @05:27AM (#366850)

      I think the most disturbing part was the "promoted tweet" telling me about Windows 10.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:08AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 28 2016, @12:08AM (#366698)

    If this wasn't the online world, would police be knocking on your door, asking to come in and look around, just to make sure you're not a terrorist? How would they know?