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

Oman

58High58 of 100, High band, 50 to 74good 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.

Speech and legal exposure

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

87Extreme87 of 100, Extreme band, 75 to 100

good confidence9 independent sources

Why this score (14 sources)

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

Surveillance and interception

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

71High71 of 100, High band, 50 to 74

good confidence3 independent sources

Why this score (4 sources)

  • Freedom House 2026 scored OMN 1 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 OMN 1.06 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 OMN 1.48 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

  • In November 2025, GCHR issued a pre-session statement to the UN Universal Periodic Review (UPR), reiterating the concerns raised in its Joint Submission with the Oman Center for Human Rights and Democracy where the organisations documented: broad Penal Code provisions (Articles 97 and 115) used to criminalise peaceful expression and assembly; the arrests of online activists, including cases where individuals were prosecuted for social media posts or participation in peaceful protests; judicial harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders, creating a chilling effect on civil society; digital restrictions, including censorship and surveillance targeting dissenting voices.

    CIVICUS Monitor country updates · observed 2026-01-14 · extracted by language model

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?

68High68 of 100, High band, 50 to 74

moderate confidence3 independent sources

Why this score (3 sources)

  • Some restrictions. There is currently no legislation guaranteeing the general right to encryption. The country’s Telecommunications Regulatory Act requires a license from the Minister in order to utilise encryption in telecommunications or between computer networks. The license determines who may operate and the conditions of operating, fees imposed for issue of license, and control of the encryption key.

    Global Partners Digital, World Map of Encryption Laws and Policies · observed 2019-06-01

  • V-Dem Digital Society Project 2025 scored OMN 0.35 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

  • Die Nutzung von VPN-Netzwerken wird kontrolliert und kann zur Strafverfolgung führen.

    Our translation: The use of VPN networks is monitored and can lead to prosecution.

    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).

Data jurisdiction

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

61High61 of 100, High band, 50 to 74

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).

Connectivity continuity

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

47Caution47 of 100, Caution band, 25 to 49

good confidence7 independent sources

Why this score (26 sources)

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?

43Caution43 of 100, Caution band, 25 to 49

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).

Network threat

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

13Low13 of 100, Low band, 0 to 24

moderate confidence1 independent sourceEvidence is ageing: contributing sources are weighted at 66% of full strength.

No reports were found of attacks, interception or fraud aimed at visitors using networks here. 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 (1 indirect source)

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 10.5 points over 61 days, from 47 to 57.5. 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 Oman. They are where to look if you want to test what is above against something we did not use.

Sources

This assessment draws on 13 sources: Auswärtiges Amt, Reise- und Sicherheitshinweise; CIVICUS Monitor country updates; Freedom House, Freedom in the World; Georgia Tech Internet Intelligence Lab, Internet Outage Detection and Analysis; Global Affairs Canada, Travel advice and advisories; Global Partners Digital, World Map of Encryption Laws and Policies; International Telecommunication Union, Global Cybersecurity Index; Open Observatory of Network Interference, OONI measurement data; SMEX, via a site scoped search; The GDELT Project, GDELT Global Knowledge Graph 2.1; UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Foreign travel advice; US Department of State, Travel Advisories; V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg, Digital Society Project. 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.