~
Lol, lucky for me I trust my kids. They are all responsible adults, so the conversation about the Passport actually went like this:
Daughter: What's that?
Papa: The best hardware wallet I've ever used.
Daughter: Oh yeah, I can see that. It looks cool. It resembles an old phone, is it supposed to?
As for the security guard at the airport, he will never see the Passport. I travel with the ColdCard which seems to attract no attention in my experience.
If you want incognito hardware wallet, than I guess best option for you is credit card format hardware wallets (Tangem, Satochip, etc.) that don't have any screen, and they communicate with application on smartphone.
You can carry this card format wallets in your wallet, most of them are waterproof, and can last for decades... all other hardware wallets are not incognito at all, and I saw most of them.
I don't know about all that. First off, I refuse to load my hardware wallets into my phone. I have a few hundred bucks in my hot wallet, and that's usually all I need.
Second, if I travel for more than just a weekend (and potentially need more funds,) I'll need to have a computer with me for other reasons, and I prefer to have the ColdCard with me. And realistically a "cheap calculator" is less likely to get stolen than a credit card.
Third, I don't know how you can say that NFC chips will last for decades. They haven't even been around for decades, and mine start failing after keeping them in my wallet for a couple of years.
Of course when crossing borders or otherwise put in a position in which someone might violate their authority over you or infringe upon your rights, including possibly your various sovereignty rights that you do not even need to disclose or argue that you have, there are a variety of ways in which your devices do not need to be loaded with visible funds.. but of course, they might need to be loaded with some funds and some recent transactions in order to potentially cause an attacker, whether state authorized or a private attacker from potentially believing that you are NOT disclosing what they might conclude (falsely or otherwise) what they believe that you "should disclose."
So for example, even if your devices are confiscated because perhaps there is a perception that you are carrying value on that device (even though we know the value is not really carried on the device - even though access to the value could be facilitated by such device), there may well need to be a back up plan in which numbers and letters could be put together and reloaded on the other side of that event and to get access to funds - if there is a desire to have access to value in some location in which it might be presumed that you do not have much if any value to transact for your own personal purposes.
In the past, I have gotten confused about derivation paths and trying to figure out how to access some funds if using a different device and sometimes I have had trouble not being able to load funds or there is some level of incompatibility that I cannot figure out in a short period of time in which all of the accounts are not shown when I reload the device - and I don't claim to be sophisticated enough to always figure out what might be the solution - and surely depending on if matters might be timely, or even if matters might be sufficiently backed up, then there could be some vulnerabilities in terms of losing access to funds with the passage of time if there might be questions of how to regain access to funds or were they "only accessible" through one kind of a device.. so sometimes, I become a bit concerned that folks, including myself, might end up putting ourselves into a position in which it becomes difficult to recover funds or that we might end up leaking data that we don't want to have leaked - and whether or not carrying multiple devices solves the problem or not (or even if we might be comfortable to change the kind of devices that we use), might be questionable because maybe some of us might feel that we need the same kind of device in order to load our funds on the other end of going from one point to another point in which we might be searched.... and maybe question if we have enough information to load the replacement device, or if we are able to get the same kind of a device that we had in the new jurisdiction (or if we need to have the same kind of a device on the other end), or even question if our own security might have become too good in which we lock ourselves out of our own funds or we are trying to accomplish transactions that are beyond our own technical capabilities.. which also can be scary in terms of how much we might feel that we want to or have time to "experiment" carrying one kind of a device versus another kind of a device.
Please let's stay on-topic (Foundation Passport)...
I may well need to shut up then, even though personally, I consider that weighing the various features of various wallets and/or devices can help a person to decide if it might be worth the potential time invested to actually purchase one device or another and if s/he finds a possible current use case for such device, over other ways that s/he might be currently carrying and transmitting value in one place versus another.. including when traveling there sometimes can be some uncertainties regarding how to get from one location to another (and if opsec might be questioned) and then when getting on the other end whether access to such device might be available or even needed to access funds... ..for example, I am pretty sure that this will work on the other end, and if it will not work, then am I going to need to go back (am I able to go back) to the earlier location.