Inside the Go-Bag of an Undercover Investigative Journalist

For more than 15 years, Vegas Tenold has worked in environments where surveillance is expected and scrutiny is routine. His reporting has taken him into Gaza, Russia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo—places where device searches, questioning, and quiet monitoring are part of daily life.

The go-bag Tenold carries is not built around convenience or redundancy. It is built to withstand inspection, support a believable cover, and reduce the consequences of compromise. Every item has to make sense for the role he is operating under. Anything that doesn’t risks drawing attention.

This is not a list of tools designed to defeat surveillance. It is a system designed to survive it.

Cash Management and Controlled Loss

Tenold carries two wallets: one legitimate, one expendable.

The decoy wallet exists to be taken—by pickpockets, petty thieves, or during low-level confrontations. It contains enough cash to end the interaction without escalation. The real wallet stays out of sight.

He also wears a belt with a concealed cash compartment. The amount is limited by design. It is not meant for leverage, only resolution. Excess cash creates questions. Scarcity creates plausibility.

Decoy Devices and Cover-Consistent Technology

Tenold travels with burner phones and tablets configured with clean, non-personal profiles. These devices include basic social media accounts, benign photos, and nothing that would contradict his cover story.

They are not productivity tools. They are inspection tools.

If a device is checked, it needs to look like it belongs to the person you claim to be. No sensitive contacts. No operational material. No digital residue that invites follow-up.

Physical Security in Temporary Spaces

Hotels and short-term rentals are predictable vulnerability points. Tenold supplements built-in security with simple mechanical tools:

• Addalock: a portable door lock that adds a physical barrier without modifying the door

• Door wedge alarm: a low-tech alert system that provides immediate warning during rest

These devices do not prevent intrusion. They provide awareness and time—often the difference between control and surprise.

Digital Discipline Over Digital Tools

Tenold minimizes exposure by default:

• Bluetooth and AirDrop are disabled

• Public Wi-Fi avoided

• Physical camera covers used

• Biometric unlocks rejected in favor of passcodes

Biometrics are efficient until they are coerced. Passcodes create friction. In hostile environments, friction matters.

As Tenold puts it, the goal is to shrink the attack surface. Every unnecessary feature increases it.

Tools to Limit Digital Footprint

USB Data Blockers
Power-only adapters that prevent data transfer while charging. Essential in regions where public charging stations are known malware vectors.

Faraday Bags
Signal-blocking pouches that isolate phones and laptops from networks and trackers. When sealed, devices are effectively invisible.

These tools are not about secrecy. They are about reducing exposure during transit and downtime.

Recording and Storage Without a Visual Signature

Tenold avoids tools that announce themselves.

• Mic-pen: functions as a normal pen while discreetly recording audio to an internal SD card

• Disguised USB storage: key fob-style drives and credit card–shaped USBs that blend in during inspections

• IronKey USB drives: encrypted storage with self-lock or wipe features after repeated failed access attempts and decoy folders designed to satisfy casual inspection without exposing sensitive material

The emphasis is concealment. Data that attracts attention is data already at risk.

The Simplest Tool Work Best

One of Tenold’s most reliable tools is a grocery receipt.

Thermal paper allows notes to be written quickly and destroyed completely within seconds. No recovery. No metadata. No digital trail.

In environments where discretion matters, analog methods remain effective precisely because they are unremarkable.

The Negative Space

What is often missing from coverage of undercover or investigative fieldcraft is the expectation of, rather than the avoidance of, scrutiny.

In many of the environments Tenold works in, inspection is routine. Bags are searched. Phones are handled. Questions are asked. The risk is not being checked — it’s carrying items that don’t align with the role you’re presenting.

Tenold’s loadout reflects that reality. Nothing in the bag stands out as specialized or purpose-built. The devices, tools, and amounts carried are consistent with what a journalist or traveler would reasonably have. Anything that would require explanation has already failed its purpose.

Most failures in this space don’t come from equipment malfunction. They come from inconsistency. Items that seem harmless on their own can raise flags when they don’t fit the cover story or environment. Keeping a low visual signature reduces the need to explain yourself, which is often the safest position to be in.

Closing Assessment

Tenold’s go-bag is intentionally limited.

It prioritizes plausibility over capability and assumes that loss, inspection, or compromise are possible. Tools are selected because they blend in, can be replaced, and don’t require explanation under pressure.

The takeaway isn’t about the specific items. It’s about alignment. What you carry should match the work you claim to be doing and the environment you’re operating in.

Anything beyond that increases risk.