Slovaks who have visited the United States already know that immigration entry control, and especially an interview with an immigration official, may not be the most fun.
The United States strictly protects its borders and so the controls are, often for the first time, stricter. It is also related to people’s online behavior and the sense of false anonymity that the Internet gives them. Therefore, security experts from Aliter Technologies recommend not to succumb to this myth, which in some cases may guarantee that you will be prevented from entering the United States.
“We regularly encounter cases where a US visitor is handed over by immigration control at entry and escorted to the next return flight to Europe, or already has problems processing visas or a direct interview with an immigration official. One of the reasons for this is what we do on the internet,” explains Vladimir Balika, cybersecurity expert for Aliter Technologies, adding:These may be inappropriate images that we upload to Google or Facebook. However, portions of the contact or the complete history of our account may be made available to the authorities upon request, and the user has no idea that this data is available to US forces and may be used against the user while they are in their territory.“
There are more than five thousand technology companies operating in the United States of America.”EU-US Privacy Shield“The obligation to legally make their users’ data available. They allow it, respectively. This is made possible by various federal regulations such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows, respectively. Allow access to data by US authorities (CIA, NSA, etc.) from providers of electronic services in the United States, including metadata and content of electronic communications from European users.
The EU-US Privacy Shield is no longer valid, but the flow of data to the US has not completely stopped
In July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that this mechanism violated the Data Protection Directive (now the GDPR) and struck down the EU-US Privacy Shield. However, the flow of data from the European Union to the United States has not completely stopped. In its ruling, the European Court of Justice specifically noted the long-standing non-compliance with the requirements of mutual agreements, citing several findings of the Privacy Shield review of personal data protection conducted by European institutions and the Cambridge Analytica case.
The reason for canceling the EU-US Privacy Shield was also the fear that after data is transferred to the US, this data could be accessed by US security forces, violating the fundamental rights guaranteed by the EU Charter. “When writing cases or chatting with friends, it is necessary to think about what the user writes in the discussion, so that it does not happen precisely because for example he was not refused entry to the United States or was not legally punished during his stay in the United States,Vladimir Palichka explains and adds:However, operators who need to transfer data to the United States are not completely blocked by the aforementioned ruling of the European Court of Justice. The transfer will continue to be possible, for example, if the recipient of personal data individually provides adequate safeguards for protection.“
The cancellation of the EU-US Privacy Shield came as a result of a five-year dispute between Austrian citizen Max Schrems and Facebook, whose Irish daughter is transferring data to the US. Following a complaint from Mr. Schrems, the Court of Justice of the European Union overturned the previously applicable decision on the adequacy of the protection provided by the ‘Safe Harbor’ principles in October 2015. Five years later, following a complaint by Mr. Schrems, the EU-US Privacy Shield was again rescinded. .
“Internet maven. Reader. Tv fanatic. Friendly communicator. Certified alcohol practitioner. Bacon buff. Explorer. Evil twitteraholic.”