What would be the best way to get through customs at an airport with your Btc?

[LoyceV]

It's worth mentioning that security agents have been busted stealing cash and valuables from passengers at airports and ports.

Anyone you don't know can be a thief. If you're at the point where your seed phrase is exposed as clear text, you should assume your funds get stolen. So don't expose your seed phrase

[takuma sato]

If you switch your recieving address for each different signature campaing (for example) then after years you will have a lot of different addresses with payments.

I suppose yes, although I don't think a user will switch campaigns too often. They definitely will, but I think that most users stick to a campaign for some months.

So you would need to find a way to be able to pay with your bitcoin in a way that does not tie you to to your public addresses that have you shared here or elsewhere.

I wouldn't worry too much about it, but my suggestions are:
(1) coinjoins
(2) swap for XMR and then back to BTC
(3) LN swaps
(4) Liquid BTC peg-in and peg-out

If I was worried that my funds from campaigns A (address X), B (address Y), C (address Z) were going to be linked and prove that they 're paid to the same person, I would simply do one of the above methods on each payment individually.
But I am not worried because it's public data that apogio has received money from campaigns A,B,C on addresses X,Y,Z.

The problem with mixing coins (all of these are a form of mixing basically) is that you receive funds from random sources, so when you deposit these funds into a KYC place, or someone that you paid deposits these funds into a KYC place, then their chainalysis systems may get triggered by something you received during the funds and now you have a problem, since the person you paid to may point to you as the previous owner of these funds. So if you pay someone for a product or service that requires you doxed or you pay in person, that is a risk there. I have not found a solution for this, you have to assume some risk of this happening if you use your BTC to pay for things that require you are doxed, or pay in person for some product.

As far as campaigns, im not sure but sometimes I think they barely last a month. So you may end up with a lot of different addresses with funds.

The problem of privacy with BTC remains since if BTC was like XMR, it would be worth much less, since it's just a black box that you cannot audit. But since it's so transparent, it could lead to problems if you are receiving funds from someone non-doxed (like someone that pays you for a sig campaign, you don't know where the funds come from) or you paying someone with those funds and then triggering some problem due chainalysis systems, or trying to gain privacy by mixing the coins which is a very reasonable practice, ending up in a problem when you pay for something.

Let's say you have 1 BTC from sig campaigns, and then 1 BTC is worth a million by 2030. "Cool, let's buy a house". But then you find out these funds trigger chainalysis when you try to liquidate them for fiat. You did nothing wrong but receive some funds, but now you have a problem that you have to solve if you want to use these funds for anything relevant.

[JayJuanGee]

If you switch your recieving address for each different signature campaing (for example) then after years you will have a lot of different addresses with payments.

I suppose yes, although I don't think a user will switch campaigns too often. They definitely will, but I think that most users stick to a campaign for some months.

So you would need to find a way to be able to pay with your bitcoin in a way that does not tie you to to your public addresses that have you shared here or elsewhere.

I wouldn't worry too much about it, but my suggestions are:
(1) coinjoins
(2) swap for XMR and then back to BTC
(3) LN swaps
(4) Liquid BTC peg-in and peg-out
If I was worried that my funds from campaigns A (address X), B (address Y), C (address Z) were going to be linked and prove that they 're paid to the same person, I would simply do one of the above methods on each payment individually.
But I am not worried because it's public data that apogio has received money from campaigns A,B,C on addresses X,Y,Z.

The problem with mixing coins (all of these are a form of mixing basically) is that you receive funds from random sources, so when you deposit these funds into a KYC place, or someone that you paid deposits these funds into a KYC place, then their chainalysis systems may get triggered by something you received during the funds and now you have a problem, since the person you paid to may point to you as the previous owner of these funds. So if you pay someone for a product or service that requires you doxed or you pay in person, that is a risk there. I have not found a solution for this, you have to assume some risk of this happening if you use your BTC to pay for things that require you are doxed, or pay in person for some product.

As far as campaigns, im not sure but sometimes I think they barely last a month. So you may end up with a lot of different addresses with funds.

Seems problematic if many of us cannot feel that we are able to transact with others based on being worried about chain analysis or feeling that we need to do our own chain analysis in order to transact with others... so sure if we are sending we may have some ideas from where our coins came, but then we might also lose track in regards to some of our transactions.

The problem of privacy with BTC remains since if BTC was like XMR, it would be worth much less, since it's just a black box that you cannot audit. But since it's so transparent, it could lead to problems if you are receiving funds from someone non-doxed (like someone that pays you for a sig campaign, you don't know where the funds come from) or you paying someone with those funds and then triggering some problem due chainalysis systems, or trying to gain privacy by mixing the coins which is a very reasonable practice, ending up in a problem when you pay for something.

Let's say you have 1 BTC from sig campaigns, and then 1 BTC is worth a million by 2030. "Cool, let's buy a house". But then you find out these funds trigger chainalysis when you try to liquidate them for fiat. You did nothing wrong but receive some funds, but now you have a problem that you have to solve if you want to use these funds for anything relevant.

There are some coins that you are receiving in small doses over years and years and years, and sure there could be some coins that you receive in larger transactions.  Let's say that you sell your car or some higher ticket item, and even if you have some smaller transactions, they might come from questionable sources and then the questionable sources add up... maybe then you are having to answer for someone else's coins when you are told that you are a suspect in some crime or maybe that you are getting locked out of some exchange because the source of your coins, a few hops back, are of "questionable" origins.

[apogio]

Let's say you have 1 BTC from sig campaigns, and then 1 BTC is worth a million by 2030. "Cool, let's buy a house". But then you find out these funds trigger chainalysis when you try to liquidate them for fiat. You did nothing wrong but receive some funds, but now you have a problem that you have to solve if you want to use these funds for anything relevant.

Well, as I 've told you multiple times, I realise the fear and I can comprehend it.

It's like buying a house with a bag full of cash. By the way, this was the only way to transact some decades ago. You 'd go load your luggage with cash (+ gold) and you 'd find a contract officer to complete the deal between you and the house seller. If the cash was checked and was marked for fraudulent activities, then you 'd be in some trouble trying to justify how you got it.

What's changed? The fact that now we have banks doing all the auditing between you and the seller. So, you know from the beginning that the money you have is theoretically (and practically) checked by the authorities.

But, keep in mind that the reason why I (and many others) love Bitcoin is the fact that we don't like intermediaries (a.k.a banks, authorities etc) to intervene in our transactions. On their side though, they don't like us for the exact same reason.

We pay taxes, we are worried about being lawful but when it comes to buying something with our honestly earned bitcoin, we must be afraid of them because they provoke fear. They can't control bitcoin otherwise, so they do what they know best.

[takuma sato]

Let's say you have 1 BTC from sig campaigns, and then 1 BTC is worth a million by 2030. "Cool, let's buy a house". But then you find out these funds trigger chainalysis when you try to liquidate them for fiat. You did nothing wrong but receive some funds, but now you have a problem that you have to solve if you want to use these funds for anything relevant.

Well, as I 've told you multiple times, I realise the fear and I can comprehend it.

It's like buying a house with a bag full of cash. By the way, this was the only way to transact some decades ago. You 'd go load your luggage with cash (+ gold) and you 'd find a contract officer to complete the deal between you and the house seller. If the cash was checked and was marked for fraudulent activities, then you 'd be in some trouble trying to justify how you got it.

What's changed? The fact that now we have banks doing all the auditing between you and the seller. So, you know from the beginning that the money you have is theoretically (and practically) checked by the authorities.

But, keep in mind that the reason why I (and many others) love Bitcoin is the fact that we don't like intermediaries (a.k.a banks, authorities etc) to intervene in our transactions. On their side though, they don't like us for the exact same reason.

We pay taxes, we are worried about being lawful but when it comes to buying something with our honestly earned bitcoin, we must be afraid of them because they provoke fear. They can't control bitcoin otherwise, so they do what they know best.

Yes, you can use Bitcoin peer to peer without intermediaries, but that would be very limited in what you can buy. You couldn't buy anything big obviously, so if you are a rich, or not even rich but having a couple millions or so (realistic when BTC goes to $300k+ in the next few years) then you are going to want to do something with that money. Are you just going to be buying stuff from local reseller? that's a joke. You want big money to do big things, and that requires an audit. And so here is the question: how do you audit coins that were paid to you by sig campaign managers? to follow with this context where you get paid for this task. That is what you should solve if you want to convert BTC into anything tangible of value. I think an audit may be possible, but you never know what coins you are holding, there is always a risk you go get an audit and end up in trouble because some of the coins you have are under investigation for some reason, so we should talk about how to solve these things. You don't want to have millions in BTC and only be limited to spending it on peanuts.

[apogio]

Yes, you can use Bitcoin peer to peer without intermediaries, but that would be very limited in what you can buy. You couldn't buy anything big obviously, so if you are a rich, or not even rich but having a couple millions or so (realistic when BTC goes to $300k+ in the next few years) then you are going to want to do something with that money. Are you just going to be buying stuff from local reseller? that's a joke. You want big money to do big things, and that requires an audit. And so here is the question: how do you audit coins that were paid to you by sig campaign managers? to follow with this context where you get paid for this task. That is what you should solve if you want to convert BTC into anything tangible of value. I think an audit may be possible, but you never know what coins you are holding, there is always a risk you go get an audit and end up in trouble because some of the coins you have are under investigation for some reason, so we should talk about how to solve these things. You don't want to have millions in BTC and only be limited to spending it on peanuts.

But:

1. If we need a 3rd party auditing mechanism, we can use the traditional banking system.
2. You can't be certain which hands have touched the coins you have. It's really impossible. And if you knew it wouldn't be a currency.

My question is (and it's not ironic at all): how have you dealt with the issues you are refering to with the current financial system? How are you able to use big money for big things? If the answer is that you 're using banks and therefore the money you have is audited, then this is exactly what bitcoin tries to solve.

I mean, what if, after all, the points that you 've mentioned aren't really issues in general, but they are only issues if you think using the current financial system's mentality?

What if I told you that Bitcoin is the best auditing mechanism that humanity has ever invented?

Instead of using Visa and Bank of America (examples) to validate that you can buy a house, you can use some thousands of Bitcoins miners and nodes to validate that you honestly possess the amount of money you say you do.

Bitcoin is made from the people, for the people.

[takuma sato]

Yes, you can use Bitcoin peer to peer without intermediaries, but that would be very limited in what you can buy. You couldn't buy anything big obviously, so if you are a rich, or not even rich but having a couple millions or so (realistic when BTC goes to $300k+ in the next few years) then you are going to want to do something with that money. Are you just going to be buying stuff from local reseller? that's a joke. You want big money to do big things, and that requires an audit. And so here is the question: how do you audit coins that were paid to you by sig campaign managers? to follow with this context where you get paid for this task. That is what you should solve if you want to convert BTC into anything tangible of value. I think an audit may be possible, but you never know what coins you are holding, there is always a risk you go get an audit and end up in trouble because some of the coins you have are under investigation for some reason, so we should talk about how to solve these things. You don't want to have millions in BTC and only be limited to spending it on peanuts.

But:

1. If we need a 3rd party auditing mechanism, we can use the traditional banking system.
2. You can't be certain which hands have touched the coins you have. It's really impossible. And if you knew it wouldn't be a currency.

My question is (and it's not ironic at all): how have you dealt with the issues you are refering to with the current financial system? How are you able to use big money for big things? If the answer is that you 're using banks and therefore the money you have is audited, then this is exactly what bitcoin tries to solve.

I mean, what if, after all, the points that you 've mentioned aren't really issues in general, but they are only issues if you think using the current financial system's mentality?

What if I told you that Bitcoin is the best auditing mechanism that humanity has ever invented?

Instead of using Visa and Bank of America (examples) to validate that you can buy a house, you can use some thousands of Bitcoins miners and nodes to validate that you honestly possess the amount of money you say you do.

Bitcoin is made from the people, for the people.

That is great and all but if you want to buy a house, your funds will need to be audited by the assorted authorities and the bank will want that your bitcoins are not from selling drugs on the darknet or whatever. Bitcoin is perfect in terms of honesty of transaction transparency, nobody can print more of it or change the rules etc, which is great, but this does not solve the source of funds problem, that is, if the source of funds is from doing something legal or not. Obviously signature campaigns are legal, but we don't know who is paying us. Same goes for any activity done in exchange of BTC where the payeer is not identified with a Employer Identification Number (EIN) or a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) in US terms, or a VAT number in EU terms, etc. Again, this does not mean your funds are useless and ilegal, it just means that we will need to get it audited if we want to use these funds to buy a house once BTC is worth 1 million or whatever and you are sitting on all that money, unless you want to be rich and be limited to buying groceries or off radar stuff with gift coupons but what's the point.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

It's worth mentioning that security agents have been busted stealing cash and valuables from passengers at airports and ports.

You make it sound like this is a common thing... At least in Western countries it is NOT.
Frankly I am unaware of any incidents of it happening in the US involving the CBP. Mainly because all secondary basic or advanced inspections are done according to strict protocols one of which is the mandatory presence of at least 1 other officer. All secondary inspections are video recorded from several angles and results logged and held for YEARS.

Stealing cash and valuables from travelers has always been more of an issue centered around the baggage handlers and even then in the US it is an exceedingly rare occurrence.

For some facts:
https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-search-electronic-devices
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2018-Jan/CBP-Directive-3340-049A-Border-Search-of-Electronic-Media-Compliant.pdf
Section 5 of the pdf outlines all CBP procedures.


Some hard stats on US CBP traveler screening from https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-search-electronic-devices  emphasis is mine:

Of the 420 million travelers CBP processed at ports of entry in FY 2024, 12,660,784 (3%) travelers were referred for a secondary inspection.

A border search of electronics is not a required action during a secondary inspection. In fact, CBP only conducted border searches of the electronic devices of 47,047 travelers in FY 2024, representing approximately 0.3% of secondary inspections and less than 0.01% of all arriving international travelers encountered at ports of entry.

Of the 47,047 border searches of electronic devices encountered at port of entry, 42,725 (90%) were basic searches in which the devices were not connected to external equipment to review, copy and/or analyze its contents.

Given that - I for one have zero concerns crossing US borders. Of course regarding other countries could well be a different story... It all depends on their own laws.

As a Frequent Traveller with over 8 million air-miles to my record from when I worked as an industrial laser Field Engineer for over 48 years flying all over the US and the world, at least 1/2 of the miles were from international travel. In all those years only 2x did I have to go through any sort of secondary screening in ANY country and none involved searches of my computer or phone. One country was China and the other oddly enough was Canada - both were only interested in the contents of my service tools kit and details of my work VISA.

Mod note: Consecutive posts merged

[LoyceV]

It's worth mentioning that security agents have been busted stealing cash and valuables from passengers at airports and ports.

You make it sound like this is a common thing... At least in Western countries it is NOT.

In many other countries illegal seizures or requiring bribes are still a thing, and in those countries I wouldn't count on them worrying about getting caught doing so.

Standard issue that I have my experience with when friends are asking friends to set up their wallet. Biggest mistake ever because if a real hack occurs, the friend who lens a helping hand can't prove they haven't stolen it.

Easy solution: help them set it up, teach them how to do it, and make sure they don't show you their seed phrase or anything else you shouldn't know.

[pushups44]

It's worth mentioning that security agents have been busted stealing cash and valuables from passengers at airports and ports.

You make it sound like this is a common thing... At least in Western countries it is NOT.

Boy oh boy. Theft is very, very common at airports, and while the CBP may be relatively straight on such issues, there are cases of theft involving their agents that people should be aware of. There are many, many stories according to a Google search I did right now of TSA agents engaged in theft. In ports, private security officers have been implicated in theft.

Is it likely that you will be a victim of theft at any particular point in time while going through an airport? No. Is it possible? YES. A basic Google search reveals CBP can search a person's phone. Again, this may not be the ordinary encounter, but it can happen. And how agents behave in different airports may depend on how they are trained or any supposed threat level perceived.

Not far from where I live, a police officer was busted for stealing cash from innocent people during traffic stops. Is this the norm? No. Does it happen? Yes.

As a Frequent Traveller with over 8 million air-miles to my record from when I worked as an industrial laser Field Engineer for over 48 years flying all over the US and the world, at least 1/2 of the miles were from international travel. In all those years only 2x did I have to go through any sort of secondary screening in ANY country and none involved searches of my computer or phone. One country was China and the other oddly enough was Canada - both were only interested in the contents of my service tools kit and details of my work VISA.

This can be countered very easily with personal examples from myself and others, but I will refrain from revealing personal information about myself. Let's stick to facts and not anecdotal experiences. Again, your personal experience can be countered by the person responding to you.

Note: U.S. airlines lose two million pieces of luggage each year, according to NPR: https://www.npr.org/2023/11/27/1215336777/u-s-airlines-lose-2-million-suitcases-a-year-where-do-they-end-up

The EFF has pointed out that devices can be seized during interrogations at the border:

"If you are philosophically opposed to intrusive border searches, you may feel that the importance of asserting your rights may outweigh the risk of having your devices seized, being extensively questioned, missing a flight, or otherwise being detained."

https://www.eff.org/wp/digital-privacy-us-border-2017

[LoyceV]

Note: U.S. airlines lose two million pieces of luggage each year, according to NPR: https://www.npr.org/2023/11/27/1215336777/u-s-airlines-lose-2-million-suitcases-a-year-where-do-they-end-up

Exactly. I'd worry much more about theft by luggage handlers, than theft by security agents in Western countries. Which is why I never check in any valuables. So don't leave your seed phrase in your luggage

[pushups44]

Note: U.S. airlines lose two million pieces of luggage each year, according to NPR: https://www.npr.org/2023/11/27/1215336777/u-s-airlines-lose-2-million-suitcases-a-year-where-do-they-end-up

Exactly. I'd worry much more about theft by luggage handlers, than theft by security agents in Western countries. Which is why I never check in any valuables. So don't leave your seed phrase in your luggage

Please understand, contrary to what has been suggested in this thread (and I do not mean to be sarcastic to the dude with anecdotal experiences of his 48 years of flying - possibly largely before 9/11), electronic devices can easily go missing from luggage and wind up on Craigslist or eBay. There are also organized criminals that steal from baggage carousels. I can think of other scenarios in today's climate of migration control that devices or other property get seized. But the theft issue alone - including by security personnel - should not be understated.

[LoyceV]

electronic devices can easily go missing from luggage and wind up on Craigslist or eBay.

That's why I don't check them in. Depending on the country, I've heard stories of people who keep one left shoe in their carry on, just so the luggage thief can't use their shoes
For all my trips, I now have a "disposable laptop":

I bring a disposable laptop. To access anything, you'd need to get through several layers of encryption.

It's old enough to be very unlikely to get stolen, it's secure enough for me not to worry about it, and it's cheap enough to not lose any sleep over it. But if it does get stolen, it's still inconvenient to not have access to a laptop.
It's also sturdy enough to use as a cutting board while camping

[mcdouglasx]

I would do it using steganography; I would employ a method to hide/encrypted data within an image, file, or audio. With so many variations and possibilities, I doubt anyone could discover them.

[philipma1957]

I think you list the seed to a trezor in multiple emails

I use

 live.com
yahoo.com

I have access to

my bitcointalk pms

i have  private note

i have ebay accounts

look at this ebay add.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/167426372173

note the title has the word black in it

that would be first world of my seed.

box would be the second

foot would be the third word

green would be the fourth word

https://bitcoinnews.com/learn/bitcoin-seed-word-list/