WorldRisk

Which passport do you hold?

Risk to a traveller depends on their nationality. A country that sanctions your destination, or is sanctioned by it, changes how you are treated on arrival. Choosing here adjusts every score on the site.

We hold travel advice written for four nationalities so far. Selecting anything else shows the neutral baseline, and every page says so where it applies rather than presenting it as an assessment made for you.

Kept in your browser only. Nothing is sent anywhere, and you can change it at any time from the header.

All countries

Hungary

29Caution29 of 100, Caution band, 25 to 49good confidence(7/7 dimensions)
What this score means
Extreme75 to 100
Severe and systematic. Device search, interception and detention over online activity are documented rather than theoretical. Reconsider what you carry and what you say.
High50 to 74
Substantial and consistently evidenced measures. Device inspection, monitored networks or restricted services should be expected rather than treated as unlikely.
Caution25 to 49
Some risk, and manageable with precautions. Measures are evidenced but are narrow, inconsistently applied, or the picture is mixed.
Low0 to 24
Ordinary precautions. No systematic device search, network restriction or prosecution of visitors for online speech is evidenced.

Government travel advice is written for one citizenry, so the same country carries a different assessment depending on your passport. Change it in the header.

Showing the baseline, which weights every issuer equally. No government in our corpus publishes travel advice written for you, so this is not addressed to you specifically.

Dimensions

Each dimension is scored independently, because the traveller who cares about legal exposure for what they have posted is often not the one carrying client data. Higher means more risk.

Surveillance and interception

How comprehensively are communications intercepted, retained, and monitored, and is commercial spyware in use?

56High56 of 100, High band, 50 to 74

good confidence9 independent sources

Why this score (11 sources)

  • Freedom House 2026 scored HUN 3 of 4 on freedom to express personal views on sensitive topics without fear of surveillance or retribution.

    Freedom House, Freedom in the World · observed 2026-01-01

  • V-Dem Digital Society Project 2025 scored HUN 2.77 of 4 on how comprehensively the government monitors social media and private online communication, where higher is freer.

    V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg, Digital Society Project · observed 2025-12-31

  • V-Dem Digital Society Project 2025 scored HUN 3.34 of 4 on how far privacy protection law shields communications from government access, where higher is freer. This measures what privacy law permits rather than what monitoring is practised, so it is read here as a constraint on interception rather than a measurement of it.

    V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg, Digital Society Project · observed 2025-12-31

  • The World Justice Project Rule of Law Index 2025 scored HUN 0.53 of 1 on whether freedom from arbitrary interference with privacy is effectively guaranteed, a measure built from expert assessments of warrantless interception of communications.

    World Justice Project, Rule of Law Index, sub-factor 4.6 · observed 2025-01-01

  • This law also allows authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify and fine anyone who takes part in these events.

    Global Affairs Canada, Travel advice and advisories · observed 2026-10-16 · written for CAN nationals · extracted by language model

  • Those media that managed to carve out a market position and retain their independence were kept off-kilter by years of smear campaigns , spyware surveillance , abusive lawsuits and investigations from the Sovereignty Protection Office .

    Balkan Insight (BIRN), via a site scoped search · observed 2026-05-04 · extracted by language model

  • Unresolved  Pegasus  surveillance  cases, recent DDoS  attacks  on newsrooms, and new pro-government media  acquisitions  underscore the shrinking space for independent reporting.

    Committee to Protect Journalists, via a site scoped search · observed 2025-11-10 · extracted by language model

  • Hungary’s parliament has since passed a series of other amendments tightening the government’s grip on those seeking to attend Pride, which will allow authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify people at events, and potentially fine them up to 200,000 Hungarian forint (HUF), the equivalent of $560.

    Index on Censorship, via a site scoped search · observed 2025-06-02 · extracted by language model

  • The law also grants authorities the ability to use facial recognition technology to identify individuals attending prohibited events, such as Budapest Pride, with fines of up to 200,000 Hungarian forints, $546, for those involved.

    Premium Times feed · observed 2025-04-14 · extracted by language model

  • If you participate in illegal or banned demonstrations, you can be identified by facial recognition technology and face large fines.

    Global Affairs Canada, Travel advice and advisories · observed 2026-10-16 · written for CAN nationals · extracted by language model

  • Auf Grundlage eines am 18. März 2025 verabschiedeten Gesetzes können öffentliche Veranstaltungen (z.B. „Pride March“) behördlich verboten werden. Teilnehmende an nicht genehmigten Veranstaltungen können ggf. unter Einsatz von Gesichtserkennungssoftware identifiziert und zu hohen Geldstrafen (bis zu 200.000 HUF) verurteilt werden.

    Our translation: Auf Grundlage eines am 18. März 2025 verabschiedeten Gesetzes können öffentliche Veranstaltungen (z.B. „Pride March“) behördlich verboten werden. Teilnehmende an nicht genehmigten Veranstaltungen können ggf. unter Einsatz von Gesichtserkennungssoftware identifiziert und zu hohen Geldstrafen (bis zu 200.000 HUF) verurteilt werden.

    Auswärtiges Amt, Reise- und Sicherheitshinweise · observed 2026-10-16 · written for DEU nationals · extracted by language model

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

2 excluded sources
  • ARTICLE 19, via a site scoped search, observed 2023-05-03: aged out after 3 years.
  • Committee to Protect Journalists, via a site scoped search, observed 2021-07-01: aged out after 5 years.

Speech and legal exposure

What legal risk attaches to what I have said online, or say while I am there?

51High51 of 100, High band, 50 to 74

good confidence9 independent sources

Why this score (13 sources)

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

Network threat

How hostile is the network environment to a foreign visitor, from state actors and criminals alike?

26Caution26 of 100, Caution band, 25 to 49

good confidence4 independent sourcesEvidence is ageing: contributing sources are weighted at 66% of full strength.

Why this score (4 sources)

  • ITU Global Cybersecurity Index 2024, Technical pillar: 19.38 of 20.

    International Telecommunication Union, Global Cybersecurity Index · observed 2024-12-31

  • Freedom House scored Hungary 21 of 25 on obstacles to access in Freedom on the Net, a category covering state control over internet infrastructure and gateways, regulatory and ownership control over service providers, and the independence of the regulator.

    Freedom House, Freedom on the Net, obstacles to access · observed 2025-01-01

  • In April 2026, a leaked internal memo from Mediaworks Hungary Zrt, a major pro-government media company linked to Orbán’s Fidesz party, surfaced following a large-scale cyberattack by the hacker group World Leaks, which stole around 15 million files (8.5 terabytes of data) and made them available on the dark web.

    CIVICUS Monitor country updates · observed 2026-05-06 · extracted by language model

  • SNSサイトを利用したアパート契約詐欺に遭ったという被害が報告されています。

    Our translation: Reports have been received of apartment contract fraud using SNS sites.

    Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Overseas travel safety information · observed 2026-08-15 · written for JPN nationals · extracted by language model

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

1 excluded source
  • Premium Times feed, observed 2023-09-14: aged out after 3 years.

Data jurisdiction

What happens to corporate or client data I carry into the jurisdiction?

22Low22 of 100, Low band, 0 to 24

moderate confidence1 independent source

Why this score (1 source)

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

Encryption and VPN legality

Are VPNs and strong encryption lawful, and can I be required to install an application or hand over keys?

22Low22 of 100, Low band, 0 to 24

good confidence2 independent sources

Why this score (2 sources)

  • V-Dem Digital Society Project 2025 scored HUN 3.22 of 4 on whether the government regulates the internet in a way consistent with international human rights standards, where higher is freer. This does not establish whether encryption or VPN use is lawful. It measures internet regulation in general, and is used as indirect evidence because the only survey that reads encryption law directly was published in 2019.

    V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg, Digital Society Project · observed 2025-12-31

  • OONI recorded no confirmed blocking across 13,904 measurements of anonymity and censorship circumvention tools in HUN over the 90 days to 2026-10-16, with 129 further results inconclusive.

    Open Observatory of Network Interference, OONI measurement data · observed 2026-10-16

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

Border device risk

How likely is my device to be searched, imaged, or seized at the border, and can I be compelled to unlock it?

16Low16 of 100, Low band, 0 to 24

good confidence5 independent sources

No reports were found of devices being searched, imaged or seized at this border, or of travellers being compelled to unlock them. The score below is drawn from general indicators for this country rather than from anything observed about this risk, so it describes an absence of reports rather than evidence that the risk is absent.

What the score rests on (5 indirect sources)

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

Connectivity continuity

How likely am I to lose access to the internet, or to the specific tools I depend on?

15Low15 of 100, Low band, 0 to 24

good confidence7 independent sources

Why this score (8 sources)

Report an inaccuracy (corrections need a link to the reporting, statute or research that shows it).

Trend

02550751002026-08-162026-10-16

The overall score is up 6.0 points over 61 days, from 23.3 to 29.3. Most movement is the event overlay decaying rather than anything happening: a news signal loses half its weight every three weeks, so a score drifts back toward its structural baseline on its own. A step that holds is the one worth reading.

Check this yourself

These are not inputs to the score for Hungary. They are where to look if you want to test what is above against something we did not use.

Sources

This assessment draws on 17 sources: Auswärtiges Amt, Reise- und Sicherheitshinweise; Balkan Insight (BIRN), via a site scoped search; CIVICUS Monitor country updates; Committee to Protect Journalists, via a site scoped search; Freedom House, Freedom in the World; Freedom House, Freedom on the Net, obstacles to access; Georgia Tech Internet Intelligence Lab, Internet Outage Detection and Analysis; Global Affairs Canada, Travel advice and advisories; Index on Censorship, via a site scoped search; International Telecommunication Union, Global Cybersecurity Index; Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Overseas travel safety information; Open Observatory of Network Interference, OONI measurement data; Premium Times feed; UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Foreign travel advice; US Department of State, Travel Advisories; V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg, Digital Society Project; World Justice Project, Rule of Law Index, sub-factor 4.6. Every contributing claim is quoted with its origin and date above. Model version 0.12.0, computed 2026-10-16.

If something here is wrong, say so. Corrections are handled in public, and we correct because the evidence is wrong, not because someone objects.