Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Denied Entry

daniel.haxx.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Denied Entry

#41

Post by sulam »

Paul-ish wrote: post #4
rdiddly wrote: post #2

Kudos to the QUIC working group for this absolutely correct response: "We won’t hold any further interim meetings in the US, until there’s a change in this situation."

Couldn't this hurt people in the US who want to go to a conference but would have trouble with reentry?

I'm a US citizen and routinely fly to various out of country locations including somewhat suspicious places like Belarus (no longer need a visa to go there for short trips) and have never had a problem re-entering. It probably doesn't hurt that I'm a middle-aged white guy, though.

Re: Denied Entry

#43

Post by wfunction »

lucb1e wrote: post #20
prawn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

International conferences should be considering this also. I'm a plain white guy with nothing dramatic to hide and I was apprehensive on my recent visit to the US. I can imagine people working in tech security, or with backgrounds/family from particular countries, would be more nervous.

I work in tech security and indeed, I've thought about this topic and I'd be nervous as hell. Then again, needing to put my laptop in check-in luggage (with a backdoored lock? Is that really a thing? I only saw "TSA-approved locks" mentioned somewhere and am only inferring the existence of backdoored locks here) is a no-go in the first place, so I'd need to (1) want to go to the USA, (2) not take a laptop and (3) pro…

The laptop thing seemed to have been in response to a legitimate terror threat actually, unlike all the other travel bans we've been seeing. I recall that the UK imposed it too, or was trying to, in response to intelligence reports that ISIS was going to use this attack vector.

Re: Denied Entry

#44

Post by kristianp »

pacaro wrote: post #28

Horrible though this is, it's (bizarrely) better than the pre-ESTA alternative. My brother was denied entry to the US in 2003 while traveling on a visa waiver. At this point he was detained (without access to counsel) until a suitable outbound flight was available, and deported. The red stamp in his passport renders him ineligible to apply for an entry visa until 2018. This is all on the discretion of one immigration…

In what way wasn't he innocent? Did he talk back to the official, or not have a return ticket?

Re: Denied Entry

#45

Post by badminton1 »

CaliforniaKarl wrote: post #24
badminton1 wrote: post #17

By spreading FUD in this way, I wouldn't be surprised if major conferences happening in SF start moving to other countries: Apple WWDC, GDC, Google I/O, Salesforce's Dreamforce, Oracle's JavaOne... many people go through significant effort to cost their travel and it's no fun that with no notice you can get sent back home. Really dumb move.

To be honest, I don't think San Francisco conferences being impacted would cause any movement in policy. Assuming that conferences moving would even impact policy in the first place, I'd expect Las Vegas conferences to be the ones that trigger change. Just on the tech side, Black Hat/DefCon and CES immediately come to mind. Las Vegas relies very much on conferences, and at least one casino/resort owner (Sheldon Adels…

What if one or more keynote speakers are denied entry? That can heavily impact a conference.

Re: Denied Entry

#46

Post by saghm »

Radim wrote: post #34

It's popular to poo on USA these days, but I had a similar experience with Canada. I was about to present at NIPS (a ML conference in Vancouver) in 2010, but was denied visa (Czech citizen - EU). No reason given. Those pesky PhD computer scientists, we don't want them in our country, ruining our economies! :) I also cursed a bit, but unlike the OP, didn't cry (WTF?). It's their country, their rules, their loss (I thi…

> I also cursed a bit, but unlike the OP, didn't cry (WTF?).

It's not really constructive to criticize how someone else responded emotionally to the same situation. It's great for you that you didn't cry, but it's not like anyone chooses to cry, and there's nothing wrong with them for doing so.

Re: Denied Entry

#47

Post by pacaro »

kristianp wrote: post #44
pacaro wrote: post #28

Horrible though this is, it's (bizarrely) better than the pre-ESTA alternative. My brother was denied entry to the US in 2003 while traveling on a visa waiver. At this point he was detained (without access to counsel) until a suitable outbound flight was available, and deported. The red stamp in his passport renders him ineligible to apply for an entry visa until 2018. This is all on the discretion of one immigration…

In what way wasn't he innocent? Did he talk back to the official, or not have a return ticket?

he answered no to the question "Have you ever been arrested"

Re: Denied Entry

#48

Post by Radim »

saghm wrote: post #46
Radim wrote: post #34

It's popular to poo on USA these days, but I had a similar experience with Canada. I was about to present at NIPS (a ML conference in Vancouver) in 2010, but was denied visa (Czech citizen - EU). No reason given. Those pesky PhD computer scientists, we don't want them in our country, ruining our economies! :) I also cursed a bit, but unlike the OP, didn't cry (WTF?). It's their country, their rules, their loss (I thi…

> I also cursed a bit, but unlike the OP, didn't cry (WTF?). It's not really constructive to criticize how someone else responded emotionally to the same situation. It's great for you that you didn't cry, but it's not like anyone chooses to cry, and there's nothing wrong with them for doing so.

Well, that was my initial reaction, honestly. It's great for you that your reaction was different, but it's not like anyone chooses their initial reaction. How is criticising me for it constructive?

I only wish the best for Daniel, I know the situation sucks.

Re: Denied Entry

#49

Post by 75dvtwin »

russellbeattie wrote: post #22

Being denied entry is the same as being accused of a crime, but not being allowed to face your acuser nor defend yourself in any way. It's infuriating in every way, even if it doesn't affect directly. Why? Because someone, somewhere - most likely without a shred of empirical proof - decided that it would be "safer" if people aren't told why they were denied, because otherwise the "bad guys" would be able to circumven…

Not sure I agree with the analogy " Being denied entry is the same as being accused of a crime"

Consequence of being accused of crime is prosecution, with potential loss of freedom (or death).

Consequence of being denied entry into one country in the world -- is not the same (unless you are unfairly prosecuted in your own country and there is no other country that you can go to).

Being denied to enter a country, more akin, in my view, to being denied a job interview (and subsequent employment).

Re: Denied Entry

#50

Post by kalleboo »

lucb1e wrote: post #20
prawn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

International conferences should be considering this also. I'm a plain white guy with nothing dramatic to hide and I was apprehensive on my recent visit to the US. I can imagine people working in tech security, or with backgrounds/family from particular countries, would be more nervous.

I work in tech security and indeed, I've thought about this topic and I'd be nervous as hell. Then again, needing to put my laptop in check-in luggage (with a backdoored lock? Is that really a thing? I only saw "TSA-approved locks" mentioned somewhere and am only inferring the existence of backdoored locks here) is a no-go in the first place, so I'd need to (1) want to go to the USA, (2) not take a laptop and (3) pro…

Just think of TSA locks as open source locks https://github.com/Xyl2k/TSA-Travel-Sentry-master-keys
Post reply on HN