CIA's CHECKPOINT Identity and Travel

CIA Assessment on Surviving Secondary Screening at Airports While Maintaining Cover

Organisation:
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

This is a secret document produced by the CIA's CHECKPOINT Identity and Travel Intelligence Program
to explain and advise CIA operatives on how to deal with secondary screening at airports, as they travel
to and from covert CIA operations using false ID, including into and out of Europe. The document details
specific examples of operatives being stopped under secondary screening at various ariports around the
world; how and why the person was stopped and offers advice on how to deal with such circumstances
and minimise the risks if stopped to continue maintaining cover. The document was created for
distribution within the organisation and other officials who hold appropriate clearances at Executive
Branch Departments/Agencies of the US Government. The document's overarching predominant advice
is to maintain cover, "no matter what".

3
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
Introduction (U)
Secondary screening—a potentially lengthy and detailed look by airport officials at
passengers not passing initial scrutiny—can significantly stress the identities of
operational travelers.
Border-control officers at international airports use primary screening
to quickly evaluate arriving passengers and identify those that may not be admissible, such as
illegal immigrants, narcotics traffickers and other criminals, terrorists, or intelligence officers.
For countries with authoritarian regimes, airport officials may also want to deny entry to
foreign political activists or nongovernmental organization (NGO) officials. Security or customs
inspectors can refer travelers to secondary when they find weapons, drugs, or other contraband
on their persons or in their baggage. (C//NF)
Referral to secondary screening can occur if irregularities or questions arise during
any stage of airport processing—immigration, customs, or security—and regardless
of whether the traveler is arriving, in transit, or departing.
Officials may also randomly
select travelers.
The resulting secondary screening can involve in-depth and lengthy
questioning, intrusive searches of personal belongings, cross-checks against external
databases, and collection of biometrics—all of which focus significant scrutiny on an operational
traveler. (S//NF)
This study examines triggers for secondary selection used at various international airports, the
range of subsequent scrutiny of identity, and traveler responses that are most likely to pass
secondary inspection with cover intact. For the study, CHECKPOINT researched available
all-source intelligence reporting but also incorporated a number of secondary screening
experiences from operational travelers. The information cut-off date is 31 May 2010. (S//NF)
NOTE:
Although the information available is sufficient to provide general insights into the
secondary screening criteria and procedures that travelers may experience at foreign airports,
it is insufficiently detailed, comprehensive, and timely to provide tactical intelligence
for operational travelers using nonofficial cover.
Moreover, the examples cited in the study
illustrate the range of potential experiences but do not evaluate specific airports. (S//NF)
This finished intelligence product contains reporting that carries the ORCON dissemination
control but has been pre-approved by the originator for distribution to officials who hold
appropriate clearances at Executive Branch Departments/Agencies of the US Government.
Sharing this product with other Executive Branch Departments/Agencies of the US Government
does not require contacting CHECKPOINT or reporting originators before dissemination.
Recipients must obtain originator approval prior to written or verbal communication of any portion
of this product to State, Local, Tribal, and Private Entities and for all other uses not pre-approved
by the originator. (U//FOUO)

5
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
information. Countries requiring advance
passenger information include Australia,
Canada, China, Costa Rica, Cuba, India,
Japan, Mexico, South Korea, South Africa,
Spain, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, the
United Kingdom, and the United States. PNR
information comes from airline reservation
systems and contains personal information
such as credit card number, e-mail address,
and seating preference. (U)
Security services lacking APIS or PNR
information may have other arrangements to
receive passenger manifests ahead of time.
For example, the Airport Police Intelligence
Brigade (BIPA) of the Chilean Investigative
Police does not routinely obtain advance
passenger manifests but can request the
information from airlines on an ad hoc basis
to search for targets of interest. Strict privacy
laws covering Danish citizens extend to all
passengers traveling through Copenhagen
airport such that the Danish Police
Intelligence Service (PET) cannot legally
obtain routine access to flight manifests.
However, if one of PET’s four cooperative
airline contacts is on duty, the service can
unofficially request a search on a specific
name, according to August 2007 liaison
reporting. (S//OC/NF)
Airport Primary Screening
In primary inspections, immigration inspectors
examine passports and visas, if visas are
required, for validity and authenticity and to
verify individuals’ identities. They frequently
query watch lists or other databases for
immigration violations, criminal records, or
national security concerns and ask basic
questions pertinent to admissibility. The entire
process usually lasts no more than a few
minutes to enable airports to keep up with the
flow of incoming travelers. If there is a watch-
list match or inspectors decide that travel
documents are suspect or have some reason
to doubt a passenger’s stated reason for
travel, they refer the passenger to secondary
screening. Officials at US airports on average
Pre-Arrival Screening
Although selection for secondary
screening frequently occurs while
travelers are at the airport answering
questions from immigration officers,
authorities may also preselect passengers
because of some flags in their visa
applications or airline records.
Many
countries issue visas upon arrival, however,
nearly 50 countries require US tourist-
passport holders to submit visa applications
before travel. For holders of US diplomatic
or official passports, the number of countries
requiring visas before arrival rises to over
120. Security and intelligence services
participating in vetting visa applications, either
comprehensively or on an ad hoc basis,
include those of Georgia, Libya, Pakistan,
Russia, Syria, and Uzbekistan. (S//OC/NF)
Available reporting does not detail the
criteria with which security services
screen visa applications, but confirmed
or suspected government or military
affiliation almost certainly raises the
traveler’s profile.
Applications can be
extensive to assist with the vetting process for
immigration authorities and the intelligence
and security services. For example, Russia’s
visa application form requires employer name,
address, telephone number, supervisor’s
full name, and applicant’s position for the
current and past two places of employment.
The application also requires military dates
of service, rank, occupation, specialized
skills; experience with nuclear, biological, or
chemical activities; and all professional, civil,
and charitable organizations of which the
applicant is or was a member, contributed to,
or worked with. (S//OC/NF)
Immigration officials may also receive
advance information on arriving passengers
from airlines through an advance passenger
information system (APIS) or passenger
name records (PNRs). APIS information,
which enables an advance check against
watch lists, includes passenger name, date
of birth, sex, passport details, and contact
6
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
Watch-list Hit
Border-control officials in many countries
use watch lists—national, regional, and
international—to screen travelers. For
example, the Schengen Information System
(SIS), an EU-wide database, contains one
million alerts on persons wanted by the police,
subject to entry bans, or missing. Most SIS
entries deal with other immigration issues
such as visa denials or expulsions, and only
2.5 percent are criminal-related. Elsewhere,
the watch list focus may be different. For
example, the overwhelming majority of names
on the Directorate General for Immigration
(DGI) watch list at Soekarno-Hatta
International Airport in Jakarta, Indonesia, are
nationals suspected of corruption or financial
crimes. (S//OC/NF)
Watch lists maintained by security services
can also include names of confirmed or
suspected intelligence officers, according to
reporting from several clandestine sources
and the US Embassy in Dushanbe.
•
Austria’s Federal Office for the Protection
of the Constitution and Counterterrorism
(BVT) and Singapore’s Internal Security
Department (ISD) list Russian intelligence
officers.
•
Colombia’s Administrative Department
of Security (DAS) lists Iranian and
Venezuelan intelligence officers.
•
Tajikistan’s State Committee for National
Security (GKNB) lists intelligence officers
belonging to unidentified Western
countries. (S//OC/NF)
Available reporting does not confirm the
presence of names of suspected or confirmed
send about one in 30 foreign tourists and
business travelers to secondary although
particular airports may impose higher
percentages for certain groups. For example,
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
agents in 2007 imposed secondary screening
on 20 percent of Cubans arriving at Miami
International Airport. Available reporting does
not indicate secondary selection percentages
for foreign airports. (U)
With the exception of Israel’s Ben Gurion
airport and a few others, immigration
inspectors conducting primary screenings
generally lack the time and tools to conduct
in-depth examination of travelers’ bona fides.
EU norms stipulate that passport checks
take no longer than 20 seconds per traveler.
Dutch Royal Military Police (KMAR) officers
at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam are under
instruction to spend no more than 10 seconds
evaluating each passport although few
officers achieve this speed, according to July
2009 liaison reporting. (S//OC/NF)
Triggers for Secondary Screening
Referral to secondary screening can occur
for concrete reasons, such as a watch-
list match or discovery of contraband,
because of random selection, or because
the inspector suspects that something about
the traveler is not right. According to the
CBP, inconsistencies or conflicts identified
in the interview or documentation, including
catching the person in a false statement,
unreasonable explanation for travel, or
anomalies in ticketing or reservations will
prompt a referral to secondary screening.
Travelers from specific countries arriving at
international airports are more likely to receive
heightened scrutiny, and referral to secondary
screening, than other travelers. Behavior,
dress, and demeanor also factor into an
inspector’s decision. However, no traveler is
immune from the possibility of secondary—
many foreign airports have an administrative
requirement for a minimum number of random
selections.

7
Secondary
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
US intelligence officers on foreign watch
lists; however, this probably should be
assumed. Hostile and probably even allied
services seek to identify US and other foreign
intelligence officers. (S//NF)
Discovery of Contraband
Security and customs officials have wide
latitude to search passengers and their
checked and carry-on baggage for weapons,
drugs, and contraband. Although drugs are
a common target of customs inspectors,
the definition of contraband is country-
dependent. For example, travelers at Imam
Khomeini Airport in Tehran, Iran, found with
videos or photographs of protests or other
opposition activity are directed to a secondary
questioning room where they undergo full
searches of laptop computers and other
electronics. Bahrain International Airport
security officials refer to secondary screening
travelers carrying unusual electronic
equipment. (S//OC/NF)
Passport Irregularity
Problems with passports, the main travel
document worldwide, are a frequent cause of
referral to secondary. Fraudulent passports,
possession of multiple passports, and
passports containing data in conflict with visas
may prompt secondary scrutiny. Most users of
fraudulent documents seeking to enter Europe
are illegal migrants from poor countries. For
example, the majority of counterfeit passports
uncovered in Ireland are from Brazil, China,
and Romania. Officials also focus on
fraudulent use of genuine passports. Falsified
travel documents intercepted at Santiago
International Airport in Chile are usually
genuine Bolivian, Colombian, and Peruvian
passports but with counterfeit EU or US visas.
Illegal travelers may carry stolen passports
and attempt to pass themselves off as the
person in the photograph. (S//OC/NF)
The Turkish National Intelligence Organization
(TNIO) assesses that possession of multiple
passports is indicative of an individual
attempting to obscure their real reason for
traveling to Turkey. Possession of three
passports––Iranian, Israeli, and Italian––
prompted the apprehension in Frankfurt in
January 2008 of an Iranian citizen. Inspectors
at Baghdad International Airport specifically
look for appropriate customs and immigration
stamps to ensure travelers are not using
multiple passports. (S//OC/NF)
Immigration inspectors may look for evidence
of fraud even with e-passports.
Media
reports indicate that computer researchers
have inserted fraudulent digital images into
e-passports. Although falsified e-passports
will not have the correct digital signature,
inspectors may not detect the fraud if the
passports are from countries that do not
participate in the International Civil Aviation
Organization’s Public Key Directory (ICAO
PKD). Only 15 of over 60 e-passport-issuing
countries belong to the PKD program, as of
December 2010. (U)
Suspicious Signs
Airport inspectors can also refer to secondary
screening individuals who arouse suspicion
but for whom there is no substantive cause
for denying entry. An airport screening
procedures manual published for internal
use in 2004 by International Consultants on
Targeted Security (ICTS) International, an
Israeli-founded company and world leader
in profiling techniques, lists suspicious signs
in passenger behavior, documentation,
tickets, or baggage. Although dated, the ICTS
guidelines probably are typical and remain
valid. (S//NF)
Behavior
Foreign airports use cameras and undercover
officers to identify passengers displaying
unusually nervous behavior. Physiological
signs of nervousness include shaking or
trembling hands, rapid breathing for no
apparent reason, cold sweats, pulsating
carotid arteries, a flushed face, and avoidance
of eye contact.

ICTS Profiling Guidelines (U)
8
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
•
At Budapest’s Ferihegy Airport in
Hungary, security officers use closed-
circuit television (CCTV) and one-way
mirrors to monitor passengers for signs of
nervousness.
•
The Bahrain National Security Agency
(BNSA) deploys undercover officers in
the arrivals lounge of Bahrain Airport to
actively look for travelers who appear to
be nervous.
•
Officers of the National Security Service
(NSS) in Mauritius use video cameras to
observe arriving passengers as they exit
the aircraft and retrieve their baggage,
zooming on individuals’ faces to study
their expressions.
•
During passenger arrival procedures at
Burgas International Airport in Bulgaria,
multiple border police officials, including at
least one officer behind the passengers at
passport control, monitor passengers for
signs of nervousness or other suspicious
behavior. (S//OC/NF)
Suspicious behavior includes continuously
switching lines or studying security
procedures. Officials at Abidjan International
Airport in Cote d’Ivoire noticed a male
passenger frequently switching lines to
avoid processing at a particular booth and
referred the traveler to secondary screening.
If officials at Narita Airport in Tokyo, Japan,
notice someone who appears to be studying
the customs inspection process, they assume
that someone in that group of passengers
must be attempting to smuggle drugs or other
contraband and intensify their inspection
efforts. (S//OC/NF)
Country of Origin
Immigration and customs officials at various
airports associate specific countries with
illegal immigration, terrorism, or drugs and
are more likely to refer those travelers to
secondary screening. (U)
ICTS Profiling Guidelines (U)
Behavior
•
Unusual nervousness or anxiety by passenger or those accompanying the passenger
.
•
Secret contact with other passengers lacking apparent ties.
•
Appearance of lying or withholding information.
Passport
•
Lack of familiarity with passport entries (biographic page, previous travel).
•
Stamps or visas from a terrorism-sponsoring country.
•
Inability to speak the language of the passport-issuing country.
Ticket
•
Unusual itinerary.
•
Purchase manner unusual to the place of issue.
•
Purchase or itinerary change within 24 hours of the scheduled flight.
Baggage
•
Baggage or contents inconsistent with the passenger’s appearance, profession, or ticket class.
•
Contents inconsistent with passenger’s description of contents.
•
Amount of baggage unusual for the ticketed itinerary. (S//OC/NF)

9
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
This table is SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN.
Area of
Concern
Airport
Travelers’ Countries of Origin
Illegal
Immigration
Portela International Airport,
Lisbon, Portugal
Western Africa; portions of Eastern Europe;
former Portuguese colonies of Angola, Brazil,
Guinea-Bissau, and Mozambique
Simon Bolivar Airport,
Caracas, Venezuela
Cuba
Soekarno-Hatta International
Airport, Jakarta, Indonesia
Afghanistan and Iran
Terrorism
Eleftherios Venizelos Airport,
Athens, Greece
Egypt, Iran, and Iraq
Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Iraq, Iran,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Sri Lanka
Saudi Arabia (various)
Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and the
Palestinian territories
Drug
Trafficking
Eleftherios Venizelos Airport,
Athens, Greece
Afghanistan, India, the Netherlands, and
Pakistan
Narita Airport, Tokyo, Japan
Amsterdam and Bangkok
Seychelles Airport, Victoria,
Seychelles
Nigeria
Travel Pattern
A travel history that indicates possible
association with narcotrafficking, Islamic
extremism, or illegal immigration can prompt a
referral to secondary. A review of clandestine
reporting reveals examples of what various
countries consider to be suspicious. The
Chilean Investigative Police (PICH) considers
travel originating in East Asia with multiple
stops as potentially suspicious. The Gambian
National Intelligence Agency (NIA) considers
frequent travel to Nigeria and Guinea-Bissau
as suspicious. Israel’s security personnel
focus on frequent travel to Islamic countries.
Venezuela’s Office of National Identification
and Foreign Status (ONIDEX) flags foreign
travelers who travel to Venezuela five or
more times a month for subsequent
secondary interviews. Zambian immigration
officers suspect that a pattern of short-stint
trips between Zambia, Pakistan, and
South Africa indicates possible drug
smuggling. (S//OC/NF)
Ticket and Baggage
Ticket purchase anomalies can result in
a referral to secondary. Czech Airlines
(CSA), the primary screening authority for
passengers departing Ruzyne Airport in
Prague focus on reservation details such as
cash payment, ticket purchased at the airport
or on the travel date or the day before, one-
way travel, and lack of checked baggage. For
example, CSA preselected a Nigerian national
with one-way ticket and no checked baggage
in July 2009 for secondary screening

10
Secondary
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
according to a Czech Airlines official. The
South African Immigration Liaison (SAIL) team
at Johannesburg airport examines departing
travelers for one-way tickets, same-day ticket
purchase, ignorance of final destination,
or travel rationales that do not appear to
be bona fide, the US Embassy in Pretoria
reported. A Dutch Government investigation
of the failed 2009 Christmas Day bombing
concluded that the suspect should have been
sent to secondary screening because of his
cash ticket payment, ticket issuance in a third
country, and lack of baggage. (S//OC/NF)
April 2007 reporting resulting from a liaison
exchange with the Hungarian Special Service
for National Security (SSNS) provides
insights into factors considered by officers at
Ferihegy airport in Budapest, Hungary when
examining tickets. Officers check whether
the traveler used a business-class ticket for
tourist travel, whether the ticket fare code
represents a government or military discount,
or whether a government travel agency
booked the ticket. Hotel and car reservations
are similarly examined for unusual discounts
or government affiliation. (S//OC/NF)
An unexplained lack of baggage probably
would raise suspicions. SSNS officers
conducting baggage inspection at Ferihegy
airport may also further investigate a
passenger if they found:
•
An amount of baggage inappropriate for
the length of stay
•
Multiple new items, such as alarm clocks
or notebooks, in baggage.
•
Carelessly packed baggage when
passenger is purportedly an experienced
business traveler.
•
Unopened and unmarked maps,
guidebooks, or other literature. Maps of
unrelated cities in baggage for a purported
tourist traveler.
•
Camera quality not matching the traveler’s
profile or camera memory card insufficient
for a lengthy tourist trip. (S//OC/NF)
Other Factors
A review of clandestine reports suggests
that a passenger’s language capability, age,
appearance, or background may all factor
into a security official’s decision to refer the
traveler to secondary.
•
In an operation to screen for Hizballah
members traveling from Venezuela, the
Mexican Center for Investigation and
National Security (CISEN) planned to take
into secondary screening Venezuelan
passport holders without a mastery of
Spanish.
•
To identify operatives or sympathizers
of the Kongra Gel (KGK, formerly PKK),
Kurdish passengers with a Turkish or
Iranian accent arriving at Irbil airport in
Iraq are automatically sent to secondary.
•
Security personnel at Ben Gurion
Airport in Tel Aviv, Israel, commonly
refer military-aged males traveling alone
with backpacks to secondary screening,
regardless of their nationality or skin color.
•
Salvadoran security services identified
a suspected Venezuelan Government
courier on the basis of a military style
haircut, physical fitness, casual dress, and
little baggage.
•
Japanese customs officials pay careful
attention to single travelers, especially
young Westerners, because they may be
drug couriers.
•
Chilean Investigative Police (PICH)
officers pay close attention to male
travelers from China, particularly those
between the ages of 16 to 28 because of
illegal immigration concerns.
•
Egyptian security officials at Cairo airport
regularly select visitors of certain ethnic

11
Secondary
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
or work backgrounds for secondary
questioning to ascertain the nature of
their business. US-Arabs, particularly
US-Egyptians, garner a high amount of
scrutiny. Other backgrounds attracting
increased scrutiny include Christian-
Arabs or Jews, human rights or other
humanitarian workers, and individuals with
advanced scientific degrees. (S//OC/NF)
Random Selection
Even if operational travelers do everything
correctly, the possibility remains that
airport officials will select them for
secondary screening
. The Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) estimates that
about 12 percent of US-bound passengers
are randomly selected for additional screening
at overseas airports. Random selection
is a significant component of the security
measures employed by the US Transportation
Security Administration (TSA). (U)
Airport officials may also randomly select
travelers for the purpose of extorting bribes.
April 2010 clandestine reporting from a source
with secondhand access indicates that the
manager of the Mogadishu International
Airport in Somalia made a habit of selecting
at least one passenger from each flight
for secondary inspection, accusing the
passenger of illegal activity, and forcing the
passenger to pay a bribe for release. Although
official passport holders at Chittagong airport
in Bangladesh receive expedited processing
and minimal scrutiny, tourist-passport
holders are frequently subject to secondary
questioning lasting an hour until a $50 bribe is
paid. (S//OC/NF)
Secondary Screening
The combination of procedures available
in secondary, a stressful experience
for any traveler, may pose a significant
strain on an operational traveler’s ability
to maintain cover.
Individuals singled
out during primary inspection are sent to
a secondary holding area. After travelers
Secondary Screening in Syria (U)
A Syrian airport officer removed a US
businessman from the immigration line at
Aleppo International Airport and questioned the
businessman in secondary for approximately
one hour. The officer explained the need to
obtain additional information as standard
procedure for all US citizens. Although
other officials examined the businessman’s
passport and mobile telephone, the airport
officer questioned the businessman on his
Arabic-language proficiency, reason for
traveling to Syria, identities of those with
whom the businessman planned to meet,
the businessman’s employment with an
emphasis on whether he was an employee
or owner, where the US passport was issued,
and whether someone was meeting the
businessman at the airport. Syrian officials also
demanded that the businessman telephone his
Syrian point of contact and asked the contact
the same questions. (S//OC/NF)
undergo a wait, inspectors conduct “soft” or
“hard” secondary processing. Soft secondary,
which is usually brief, is normally directed at
legitimate travelers who require additional
processing, such as travelers arriving with
immigrant visas. Inspectors most likely
conduct additional database checks on the
travelers’ names, dates and places of birth,
and passport numbers and may search the
travelers’ personal belongings and baggage.
Failure to pass soft secondary or suspicion
on the part of the inspector that criminality
is involved will invoke hard secondary. In
extreme cases, hard secondary screening can
involve a multi-hour, in-depth interrogation
with forensics-level examination of personal
electronics, detailed inspection of personal
effects, and use of external databases to
corroborate traveler stories. (S//OC/NF)
Airport authorities generally use their most
experienced inspectors or intelligence
personnel to conduct secondary inspections.
For example, a small cadre of experienced
interviewers from the Police Intelligence
Prefecture of the Chilean Investigative Police
conducts secondary inspection at Santiago

12
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
International Airport. Some officers have
specific regional and cultural knowledge,
particularly on Peru and Bolivia, which they
can bring to bear in verifying interviewees’
bona fides. At the Sri Lanka airport, only
the Sri Lankan Immigration and Emigration
Department’s chief immigration officer and the
duty officer manager can conduct secondary
interviews. Directorate for Border Security and
Immigration (Direction des Frontieres et des
Etrangers, DEF) officers from the intelligence
unit, not regular immigration officers, staff
secondary interrogation areas at Tunisian
airports. (S//OC/NF)
Inspectors focus on body language during
questioning. The Hungarian National Security
Office (NSO) officers conducting secondary
screening at Budapest’s Ferihegy Airport
read the body language, behavior, and
mannerisms of those being interrogated
to conclude if they are lying or withholding
information. During interrogations, officers
question travelers on their travel reasons and
arrangements to see if they appear plausible.
They also examine baggage, tickets, and
reservations. The Chilean Investigative Police
trains its secondary interviewers to look for
nonverbal cues during interviews in addition
to evaluating general appearance, clothing,
and carry-on effects. If travelers at Irbil airport
in Iraq are deemed evasive, screeners return
them to their city of origin. (S//OC/NF)
Travelers can legally be held in secondary
screening for hours, if not longer. Officials
can detain travelers in secondary screening
at the Tbilisi International Airport in Georgia
for up to three hours. Turkey can hold
foreigners in secondary screenings for up
to 24 hours. Indian authorities in January
2011 held a Chinese national at New Delhi
airport for 36 hours, according to media
reporting. The Brazilian Federal Police
(DPF) can detain travelers at Sao Paulo’s
Guarulhos International Airport for up to 48
hours.
Travelers undergoing secondary
inspection most likely have no right
of access to their embassy or to other
outside assistance.
(S//OC/NF)
Lengthy secondary interrogation provides
time for security officials to verify or refute
the traveler’s story and raises the pressure
on passengers attempting to hide illegal
behavior. Officers can use the time to
consult external sources, collect additional
information, and conduct an in-depth search
of passengers and their baggage. (S//NF)
Verification of Travelers’ Stories
As part of their investigation of travelers,
officials can telephone their contacts.
At
Ambouli airport in Djibouti, the senior
immigration officer’s secondary investigation
of a suspect traveler included telephoning
the traveler’s sponsor. Officials at the
Tripoli airport scrutinized 21 males with a
specific given name who entered Libya from
Tunisia, making telephone calls to verify their
information. (S//OC/NF)
Officials can also access national and
international databases and the Internet.
Immigration databases at many ports
of entry allow border officials to retrieve
previous travel to the country as part of
their investigation. For example, Brazilian
Federal Police (DPF) officers conducting
secondary screenings at Guarulhos Airport
in Sao Paulo can access travelers’ travel
histories. Chilean Investigative Police (PICH)
inspectors conducting secondary screenings
conduct real-time searches of Interpol
records by name, date of birth, or passport
number. Estonian Border Guard Service
(BGS) officers access the Internet to locate
hotels, conferences, or companies identified
by passengers to confirm or discredit their
story. Internet access also allows airport
security officials to examine travelers’ social
and business network accounts to confirm
that their Web presence corresponds with
their persona. For example, Foursquare and
Linked-In are business equivalents to the
Facebook social network. Security officials
might also expect a sales or marketing

13
Secondary
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
traveler to have a Twitter account. The
absence of such business-related Web
accounts probably would raise a business
traveler’s profile with officials. (S//OC/NF)
Collection of Additional Data
Officials can collect additional biographic or
travel data to flesh out the traveler’s story.
In July 2009, airport officials in Shiraz, Iran,
used a screening questionnaire in secondary
screening to collect detailed information on
US-Iranians holding dual nationality. An officer
verbally translated the questionnaire for the
non-Farsi speaking travelers, transcribing
the responses in Farsi onto the questionnaire.
Required information included name, date
and place of birth, current address, length
of time living there, other addresses, places
traveled, telephone number, reason for living
in the United States, occupation, reason
for visiting Iran, field of study (for students),
address in Iran, name and telephone number
of host, the host’s relation to the traveler,
and other areas to be visited. Tehran airport
security personnel also request that visiting
US-Iranians log into their personal e-mail
accounts and the officers then review
the contacts and types of e-mails in the
accounts. (S//NF)
Officials can collect fingerprints or other
biometrics, and determine if the passenger
has a past record. In secondary inspection
at Singapore airport, officials fingerprint and
photograph suspect individuals and run
queries against the Biometrics Database for
Immigration Clearance (BDIC). The database
contains 10 fingerprints for previously
deported expellees and other criminals.
In addition to using fingerprints to identify
immigration offenders who attempt to re-enter
Singapore using different identities, in early
2009, the BDIC system also incorporated
face-recognition capabilities to allow
Singapore Immigration and Customs Agency
(ICA) officers to match travelers against
photographic images of black-listed persons.
According to August 2009 clandestine
reporting, the Salvadoran Government is
working to obtain fingerprint readers for use
in secondary with repatriated deportees and
other travelers of interest, primarily those
suspected of association with organized crime
or Central American gangs. (S//OC/NF)
In-depth Search of Belongings
Customs officials conducting secondary
screening at Narita Airport in Tokyo, Japan,
may ask individuals to remove all items
from their accompanying baggage for
closer examination. Secondary screening
by immigration officials at Bole International
Airport in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia includes an
examination of pocket litter. (S//OC/NF)
Inspections can include examining belongings
for traces of explosives. At Ben Gurion
airport in Israel, the secondary screening
room contains trace-detection equipment
for explosive residue; tools for dismantling
passengers’ personal items for inspection,
particularly items unfamiliar to security
officers; and a disrobing area, divided by
privacy curtains, to conduct strip searches of
individuals, if necessary. (S//NF)
Officials can copy or confiscate a traveler’s
personal electronics. Ireland’s Garda can
image or copy electronic devices, including
telephones, once individuals are taken into
secondary screening. Russian customs
agents at Sheremetyevo airport in Moscow
confiscated without explanation a laptop
computer, thumb drive, and removable hard
drive belonging to a Department of Energy
official. (S//OC/NF)

Personal Electronics (U)
Smart phones, iPods, and MP3 players, can
pose a vulnerability to alias travel because of
their requirement for subscriptions. If border-
control officials can establish a link between
the device and the traveler’s true name,
this could present a difficulty for someone
traveling in alias. (S//OC/NF)

14
Secondary
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
The Importance of Maintaining Cover––No Matter What (S//NF)
Even when the traveler does everything right, the best protection during secondary screening is to
be well-prepared with a cover story, according to an experienced CIA traveler. In one incident during
transit of a European airport in the early morning, security officials selected a CIA
officer for secondary
screening. Although the officials gave no reason, overly casual dress inconsistent with being a
diplomatic-passport holder may have prompted the referral. When officials swiped the officer
’s bag
for traces of explosives, it tested positive, despite the officer
’s extensive precautions. In response
to questioning, the CIA officer gave the cover story that he had been in counterterrorism training in
Washington, DC. Although language difficulties led the local security officials to conclude that the
traveler was being evasive and had trained in a terrorist camp, the CIA
officer consistently maintained
his cover story. Eventually, the security officials allowed him to rebook his flight and continue on his
way. (S//OC/NF)
Dealing with Secondary
Consistent, well-rehearsed, and plausible
cover is important for avoiding secondary
selection and critical for surviving it.
A
frequent operational CIA traveler to Asia
and Europe advises that the most effective
prevention of secondary is to have simple and
plausible answers to the two most frequently
asked questions, “Why are you here,” and
“Where are you staying.” Travelers should
also ensure before traveling that everything
that officials can use to examine their bona
fides—passports, travel history, baggage,
personal electronics, pocket litter, hotel
reservations, Web presence—is consistent
with their covers. (S//OC/NF)
Mental preparation almost certainly helps
travelers pass secondary scrutiny.
Although
a certain degree of nervousness is expected,
persistent indications of deceptive behavior
will almost certainly extend the secondary
interview. According to a financial forensics
expert in the commercial sector, deceptive
persons:
•
Allow a significant pause between a
question and the response, or use
delaying sounds, like “ah” or “um.”
•
Exhibit psychosomatic behavior such as
swallowing, lip biting, perspiring, deep
breathing, frequent clothing adjustments,
or lint picking.
•
Qualify sentence meanings with words
like “typically,” “normally,” “often,” “maybe,”
or “almost” or phrases like “to be honest,”
“the truth is,” or “swear to God.”
•
Provide overly specific responses. (U)
Travelers who avoid providing
unnecessary details probably shorten
secondary interviews.
May 2009 FBI
reporting indicates that a Chinese network
security company advises its employees in
secondary to avoid appearing nervous,
keep answers simple, and not volunteer
additional information, such as details on US
contacts. (S//NF)

14
Secondary

SECRET//ORCON/NOFORN
The Importance of Maintaining Cover––No Matter What (S//NF)
Even when the traveler does everything right, the best protection during secondary screening is to
be well-prepared with a cover story, according to an experienced CIA traveler. In one incident during
transit of a European airport in the early morning, security officials selected a CIA
officer for secondary
screening. Although the officials gave no reason, overly casual dress inconsistent with being a
diplomatic-passport holder may have prompted the referral. When officials swiped the officer
’s bag
for traces of explosives, it tested positive, despite the officer
’s extensive precautions. In response
to questioning, the CIA officer gave the cover story that he had been in counterterrorism training in
Washington, DC. Although language difficulties led the local security officials to conclude that the
traveler was being evasive and had trained in a terrorist camp, the CIA
officer consistently maintained
his cover story. Eventually, the security officials allowed him to rebook his flight and continue on his
way. (S//OC/NF)
Dealing with Secondary
Consistent, well-rehearsed, and plausible
cover is important for avoiding secondary
selection and critical for surviving it.
A
frequent operational CIA traveler to Asia
and Europe advises that the most effective
prevention of secondary is to have simple and
plausible answers to the two most frequently
asked questions, “Why are you here,” and
“Where are you staying.” Travelers should
also ensure before traveling that everything
that officials can use to examine their bona
fides—passports, travel history, baggage,
personal electronics, pocket litter, hotel
reservations, Web presence—is consistent
with their covers. (S//OC/NF)
Mental preparation almost certainly helps
travelers pass secondary scrutiny.
Although
a certain degree of nervousness is expected,
persistent indications of deceptive behavior
will almost certainly extend the secondary
interview. According to a financial forensics
expert in the commercial sector, deceptive
persons:
•
Allow a significant pause between a
question and the response, or use
delaying sounds, like “ah” or “um.”
•
Exhibit psychosomatic behavior such as
swallowing, lip biting, perspiring, deep
breathing, frequent clothing adjustments,
or lint picking.
•
Qualify sentence meanings with words
like “typically,” “normally,” “often,” “maybe,”
or “almost” or phrases like “to be honest,”
“the truth is,” or “swear to God.”
•
Provide overly specific responses. (U)
Travelers who avoid providing
unnecessary details probably shorten
secondary interviews.
May 2009 FBI
reporting indicates that a Chinese network
security company advises its employees in
secondary to avoid appearing nervous,
keep answers simple, and not volunteer
additional information, such as details on US
contacts. (S//NF)