Can we also tackle the general problem, by considering the snooping to be a diplomatic problem of the locale that does it?<p>A lot of travel is discretionary, such as vacations. Academic and trade conferences can often choose where they're located. Business can often choose where they do business or expand.<p>A public interest Web site could publish a trustworthy database of incidents and report card grades of different locales, covering more concerns than the US State Dept. does.<p>Say, ExampleCon 2024 is announced to be in sunny Barlandia, and a bunch of members respond that they don't feel safe attending, because the database says that Barlandia Customs often clones the devices of visitors without apparent justifiable cause, and some alarming specific incidents. Some respond privately; some publicly announce not traveling to Barlandia, and why.<p>When planning ExampleCon 2025, organizers consider the convention center in Footopia but have learned to check the database, and find that Footopia has a totalitarian attitude towards privacy&security, as well as elevated incidence of harassment of LGBTQ+ and certain ethnic/racial identities. They don't tell the membership that Footopia was considered, but when they announce the choice of Bazland, they also link its favorable status page on the database Web site.<p>Meanwhile, the Blortcity government is taking note of this, and embarks on a intense campaign to make their status page numbers look great. A side effect -- besides their consequently growing tourism industry, and increasing tax base from new residents -- is that a lot of abusive/hostile behaviors are stopped for everyone living and visiting there.