U.S. authorities are considering a proposal that would allow border agents to review travellers’ public social media content as part of routine entry screening, prompting renewed debate over privacy, transparency and the scope of digital surveillance at the nation’s borders.
The proposal would formalise a broader use of publicly accessible posts, photos and online interactions to help determine whether an individual poses a security risk. It would build on existing policies that already require many visa applicants to disclose their social media handles but would extend the review process to those arriving at U.S. ports of entry.
Supporters argue that social media can provide critical context for identifying potential security threats, while critics warn that such assessments are ripe for misinterpretation, bias and agenda setting.
The increasing role of online content in security vetting reflects a global trend, with several countries adopting similar approaches. However, it has been suggested that algorithms and human reviewers alike can misread cultural nuances, slang or satire and that the volume of data involved raises questions about accuracy and oversight.
Jeremy Bradley-Silverio Donato, COO, Zama said:
“The proposals from the US are a stark reminder of why data privacy matters now more than ever. One’s online history shouldn’t be treated as a permanent record of worth or beliefs, especially when people evolve, grow and change over time. What someone said years ago often doesn’t reflect who they are today, as labels like ‘conservative’ or ‘liberal’ are increasingly useless in capturing real human nuance. Personal choice and freedom of expression shouldn’t be sacrificed in the name of surveillance, especially when it chills speech and curtails basic freedoms. Privacy isn’t just a technical issue; it’s about dignity and the freedom to be human.
“Privacy-preserving technologies can give authorities the security assurances they need without exposing personal data. Techniques like fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) and zero-knowledge proofs (ZKs) let systems verify risk without revealing someone’s identity or history. It’s a safer and more balanced way to build trust. They could unlock the potential to reduce the necessity to hoard data that could be misused or stolen, offering an alternative where people and privacy are protected can be achieved at the same time.
“Protecting the public doesn’t require a trade-off with protecting their rights. When governments and businesses have the tools to design systems that minimise data collection and limit who can see it, safety and privacy can reinforce each other.”
The Department of Homeland Security has not announced a timeline for formal rulemaking, and any significant expansion of screening procedures would likely undergo a public comment period. For now, officials say the proposal remains under evaluation as part of broader efforts to modernise border security tools.
