DHS proposes requesting social media identifiers on I-94 and ESTA forms
Oct 20, 2016, 4:53 am
#31
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
At least a part of the UN seems to be critical of this move by the US Government to tag huge numbers of people based on social media identifiers:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/1...edia-questions
https://www.eff.org/2016/10/un-joins...edia-questions
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/1...edia-questions
https://www.eff.org/2016/10/un-joins...edia-questions
Oct 24, 2016, 2:36 pm
#32
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 15,978
FT is a web based application and FT handles are merely identifiers aka the 'key' part of a key-pair value (KPV) stored in FT's member database. Data paired to your key includes everything from the email address you registered with to the broswer and OS you're currently using to everything displayed in your profile such as every thread you've started and every post (and edits to your posts) you've ever made ... and much more.
That's a distinction without a difference. The distinguishing feature b/w traditional versus social media is whether the format or platform permits dialogic transmission. TV, broadcast radio and newspapers are forms of monologic transmission; Usenet, IRC, BBs, MySpace, FB, Twitter, Snapchat, etc. are all forms of social media. Phones, email and ham radio would also fit the strict definition of social media even though we tend to think of two-party convos in closed or proscribed environments as private rather than social interaction.
Last edited by essxjay; Oct 24, 2016 at 3:07 pm
Oct 24, 2016, 2:55 pm
#33
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
So when I first heard about this, I FOIA'd CBP for:
"All social media identifiers of every person working for DHS and/or CBP, including:
a. Legal name
b. Title / component
c. Social media / online presence platform
d. Social media / online presence identifier / handle / URL
This is to include both professional and personal accounts, as well as any social media accounts maintained in official or organizational capacity."
Recently, I got their response. (Also posted on my twitter.)
They denied it as not collected and "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy". Not surprising of course, but might be amusing for the irony.
Somehow they neglected to address the professional / official / organizational capacity parts of the request…
"All social media identifiers of every person working for DHS and/or CBP, including:
a. Legal name
b. Title / component
c. Social media / online presence platform
d. Social media / online presence identifier / handle / URL
This is to include both professional and personal accounts, as well as any social media accounts maintained in official or organizational capacity."
Recently, I got their response. (Also posted on my twitter.)
They denied it as not collected and "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy". Not surprising of course, but might be amusing for the irony.
Somehow they neglected to address the professional / official / organizational capacity parts of the request…
Oct 24, 2016, 10:39 pm
#34
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Yes, threaded discussion forums such as FT count as social media.
FT is a web based application and FT handles are merely identifiers aka the 'key' part of a key-pair value (KPV) stored in FT's member database. Data paired to your key includes everything from the email address you registered with to the broswer and OS you're currently using to everything displayed in your profile such as every thread you've started and every post (and edits to your posts) you've ever made ... and much more.
That's a distinction without a difference. The distinguishing feature b/w traditional versus social media is whether the format or platform permits dialogic transmission. TV, broadcast radio and newspapers are forms of monologic transmission; Usenet, IRC, BBs, MySpace, FB, Twitter, Snapchat, etc. are all forms of social media. Phones, email and ham radio would also fit the strict definition of social media even though we tend to think of two-party convos in closed or proscribed environments as private rather than social interaction.
FT is a web based application and FT handles are merely identifiers aka the 'key' part of a key-pair value (KPV) stored in FT's member database. Data paired to your key includes everything from the email address you registered with to the broswer and OS you're currently using to everything displayed in your profile such as every thread you've started and every post (and edits to your posts) you've ever made ... and much more.
That's a distinction without a difference. The distinguishing feature b/w traditional versus social media is whether the format or platform permits dialogic transmission. TV, broadcast radio and newspapers are forms of monologic transmission; Usenet, IRC, BBs, MySpace, FB, Twitter, Snapchat, etc. are all forms of social media. Phones, email and ham radio would also fit the strict definition of social media even though we tend to think of two-party convos in closed or proscribed environments as private rather than social interaction.
Oct 27, 2016, 3:44 am
#35
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Various companies' government sales/solutions people/teams have been lobbying/selling various parts of USG and even some other governments on the tools they can provide to monitor and measure people based on social media identifiers.
And the USG is selling some other governments to take the same approach in use of social media identifiers. Is that write large enough to include email addresses? It could be even if it hasn't already.
It's quite interesting how for-profit tools that facilitate social relationships end up being used, in the name of security, to stifle social relationships and even travel.
Some need to check out how this kind of stuff feeds back into TSA PreCheck determinations.
And the USG is selling some other governments to take the same approach in use of social media identifiers. Is that write large enough to include email addresses? It could be even if it hasn't already.
It's quite interesting how for-profit tools that facilitate social relationships end up being used, in the name of security, to stifle social relationships and even travel.
Some need to check out how this kind of stuff feeds back into TSA PreCheck determinations.
Oct 31, 2016, 6:48 pm
#36
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 729
Various companies' government sales/solutions people/teams have been lobbying/selling various parts of USG and even some other governments on the tools they can provide to monitor and measure people based on social media identifiers.
And the USG is selling some other governments to take the same approach in use of social media identifiers. Is that write large enough to include email addresses? It could be even if it hasn't already.
It's quite interesting how for-profit tools that facilitate social relationships end up being used, in the name of security, to stifle social relationships and even travel.
Some need to check out how this kind of stuff feeds back into TSA PreCheck determinations.
And the USG is selling some other governments to take the same approach in use of social media identifiers. Is that write large enough to include email addresses? It could be even if it hasn't already.
It's quite interesting how for-profit tools that facilitate social relationships end up being used, in the name of security, to stifle social relationships and even travel.
Some need to check out how this kind of stuff feeds back into TSA PreCheck determinations.
Oct 31, 2016, 7:26 pm
#37
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,713
Are all DHS employees currently required to provide the same information that DHS is proposing collecting from travellers?
They should be required to provide the same information, keep it frequently and regularly updated, and that information should be entered in the same databases DHS proposes populating with traveler info.
After all, if you have nothing to hide....
They should be required to provide the same information, keep it frequently and regularly updated, and that information should be entered in the same databases DHS proposes populating with traveler info.
After all, if you have nothing to hide....
Nov 1, 2016, 4:43 am
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: jfk area
Programs: AA platinum; 2MM AA, Delta Diamond, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,291
Are all DHS employees currently required to provide the same information that DHS is proposing collecting from travellers?
They should be required to provide the same information, keep it frequently and regularly updated, and that information should be entered in the same databases DHS proposes populating with traveler info.
After all, if you have nothing to hide....
They should be required to provide the same information, keep it frequently and regularly updated, and that information should be entered in the same databases DHS proposes populating with traveler info.
After all, if you have nothing to hide....
[A question HUAC (anyone remember them(?)) would ask: "are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?"]
Nov 1, 2016, 7:10 am
#39
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
History repeats itself because history's lessons are poorly received and remembered. That and a lot of people still want "guilt by association" to be the order of the day, as it very much still is. DHS/CBP is just another vehicle for the continuation of old ways under new, more extensively-enabled means.
Nov 1, 2016, 7:33 am
#40
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,713
Funny that you should mention 'guilt by association'. I was just thinking about 'six degrees of separation' and the very real threat, with social media, of being unknowingly connected to practically anyone and everyone.
Data mining, social media, and a mindset inclined to suspicion are recipe for disaster.
Data mining, social media, and a mindset inclined to suspicion are recipe for disaster.
Dec 23, 2016, 12:38 pm
#41
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: LAX
Programs: UA/AA
Posts: 1,741
Politico: U.S. government begins asking foreign travelers about social media
The U.S. government quietly began requesting that select foreign visitors provide their Facebook, Twitter and other social media accounts upon arriving in the country, a move designed to spot potential terrorist threats that drew months of opposition from tech giants and privacy hawks alike.
Since Tuesday, foreign travelers arriving in the United States on the visa waiver program have been presented with an “optional” request to “enter information associated with your online presence,” a government official confirmed Thursday. The prompt includes a drop-down menu that lists platforms including Facebook, Google+, Instagram, LinkedIn and YouTube, as well as a space for users to input their account names on those sites.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...l-media-232930
Since Tuesday, foreign travelers arriving in the United States on the visa waiver program have been presented with an “optional” request to “enter information associated with your online presence,” a government official confirmed Thursday. The prompt includes a drop-down menu that lists platforms including Facebook, Google+, Instagram, LinkedIn and YouTube, as well as a space for users to input their account names on those sites.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...l-media-232930
Dec 23, 2016, 1:01 pm
#42
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
It will be interesting to see which other countries demand the same kind of info.
Will any country or collection of countries decide to stand up against such potential intrusion into the private lives of their citizens traveling under unilateral or negotiated agreements and/or under a standard of demanding a reciprocal approach that excludes such intrusion?
Will any country or collection of countries decide to stand up against such potential intrusion into the private lives of their citizens traveling under unilateral or negotiated agreements and/or under a standard of demanding a reciprocal approach that excludes such intrusion?
Last edited by GUWonder; Dec 24, 2016 at 12:05 am
Dec 23, 2016, 7:18 pm
#43
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Programs: AC E50k, A3*G, UA*S, MR Titanium, HHonors Gold, Carlson Gold, NEXUS
Posts: 3,669
It will be interesting to see which other countries demand the same kind of info.
Will any country of collection of countries decide to stand up against such potential intrusion into the private lives of their citizens traveling under unilateral or negotiated agreements and/or under a standard of demanding a reciprocal approach that excludes such intrusion?
Will any country of collection of countries decide to stand up against such potential intrusion into the private lives of their citizens traveling under unilateral or negotiated agreements and/or under a standard of demanding a reciprocal approach that excludes such intrusion?
Dec 23, 2016, 8:10 pm
#44
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: PDX
Posts: 908
Hmm... as long as they don't ask for the login and password, how is it different from a random guy on the internet peeking at your social network public profile? The CBP won't be able to see the stuff that you make private or friends-only.
Dec 24, 2016, 12:03 am
#45
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The CBP can be directed to arrange for a searching/questioning of a passenger in particular ways based on intelligence information gleaned by way of applications submitted to other parts of the USG. That includes information that arrived by a combination of using passengers' application info with hacking/social engineering/other espionage efforts using the application info.