Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

CBP Tells Airports Its New Facial Recognition Target is 75% of Passengers Leaving the US (404media.co) 40

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Slash_Account_Dot writes: Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has told airports it plans to increase its targets for scanning passengers with facial recognition as they leave the U.S., according to an internal airport email obtained by 404 Media. The new goal will be to scan 75 percent of all passengers, the email adds. The news signals CBP's increasing focus on biometric, and in particular facial recognition, systems at airports. Although it is unclear if related to the shift in goals, one traveler was also recently told by airline industry staff "CBP said everyone has to do it" when they asked to opt-out of facial recognition while boarding for an international flight last month.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CBP Tells Airports Its New Facial Recognition Target is 75% of Passengers Leaving the US More

CBP Tells Airports Its New Facial Recognition Target is 75% of Passengers Leaving the US

Comments Filter:

  • Then congress will even make it illegal to track your flight [jalopnik.com].

    You, poor peon, should be happy we don't shove a GPS tracker up your ass if you dare to try to escape our surveillance.

    • Then congress will even make it illegal to track your flight [jalopnik.com].

      Apparently, this *is* a congressionally mandated issue. From TFA (emphasis mone):

      “This is a national, not per airport, goal, and applies to flights departing the U.S.,” the spokesperson added. CBP’s ultimate Congress-mandated goal is 97 percent or greater biometric exit compliance, they added.

      In addition, TFA quotes a 2017 document:

      Facial images will be matched and then stored for no more than two weeks in secure data systems managed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security ...

      Don't know if this still holds...

      • Sounds like people just need to remind other people about the definitions of words. Hint: "goal" or "target" is not the same as "requirement." So the proper response is "I don't care about your 'goal', I decline to participate."

  • Clearly you must be up to no good and CBP must protect the boards by not letting you out!

  • New Facial Recognition Target is 75% of Passengers Leaving the US

    Like from the forehead down or left cheek over, etc...? Either way, doesn't seem very useful. :-)

  • Who cares who leaves. How about entry? What do we know about anyone arriving? I say we do DNA sampling .. track everyone’s genome and inject 5G nano chips in them. That should be good enough for about a thirty years until in-vivo whole genome editing becomes a thing and 6G replaces 5G.

    • Hotel California Style, you can checkout anytime you like, but you can never leave

    • Who cares who leaves. How about entry? What do we know about anyone arriving? I say we do DNA sampling .. track everyone’s genome and inject 5G nano chips in them. That should be good enough for about a thirty years until in-vivo whole genome editing becomes a thing and 6G replaces 5G.

      Maybe its so they know which Americans leave so they can chase them for their taxes which, like North Korea, the USA makes its expats file and pay. And no other countries do that to their citizens. The USA keeps some strange company.

      • California would love this, since they want to tax residents for ten years [scocablog.com] after leaving the state.

      • USA makes its expats file and pay.

        Yes, and there's a little section on the 1040 that says "deduct taxes paid to a foreign nation here" and most likely your net tax bill to the USA is zero. So you probably don't owe anything but you do have to file.

        • USA makes its expats file and pay.

          Yes, and there's a little section on the 1040 that says "deduct taxes paid to a foreign nation here" and most likely your net tax bill to the USA is zero. So you probably don't owe anything but you do have to file.

          Yes, you have to file. You have to let big brother know how much you make overseas, even though it should be none of their business.
          Dear Leader also requires his citizens to do the same.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      There's a reasonable argument for identifying people entering your country. Tracking or interfering with the ones leaving has historically had pretty nefarious implications.

    • They have Five Eyes to work with.
    • So long as we have time-limited visas (tourism, work, whatever) there'll be a need to track who's leaving the country in order to track who's overstaying. Whether that should require facial recognition or other biometrics is another question.

  • So this thing that "proves" who we are doesn't work. So let's just record everyone, in secret, and keep "everyone" safe that way. /sarc

    Or you could fix passports and identification in general. Anything that's not internet aware and capable is worthless. Might as well be an image they bring up on a website instead of a physical paper we need to carry around.

    Let's just stop this half pregnant stuff, and fix "privacy" (and the lack that is reality). People carry video cameras with microphones in their pock

  • How are people leaving any concern of CBP?
    Their responsibility is controlling ENTRY

  • ... CBP said everyone has to do it ...

    So, they'll make you stay, if you refuse? The usual threat of imprisonment will make everyone obey but it would be nice if a few thousand people stuck to their principles. That would be costly and a political shit-storm.

    When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
    -- Edmund Burke, 1770 (what he really said).

    Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.
    -- John Stu

    • Yeah, if you're talking about evil, you might want to consider the USA's racism problem as a more urgent priority in that case.

      • ... USA's racism ...

        Watching US news, its easy to find the mainstream media and the police repeating the 'Jim Crow' meme that black people are criminals. Black Lives Matter was meant to be a bandwagon against that but as is so common with by-the-people activism, the real criminals change the agenda. (Arson and looting in that case.)

        In many cases, the government wants activists committing crimes (How many balaclava-wearing 'activists' are really undercover police?) because that gives the status quo a 'stand your ground' exc

  • Nothing worse than what's already happening (Score:3)

    by kmoser ( 1469707 ) on Tuesday September 05, 2023 @06:01PM (#63826264)
    As bad as this is, don't they already know who you are, and what you look like, if you are taking an international flight and own a passport?
    • They may think they do, but who's to say that if a woman is carrying a passport and ID saying that she's Margret Dumont [wikipedia.org], she isn't really Natasha Fatale [wikipedia.org]?

      • And you think the shortcomings of looking at someone's face and comparing it to a database can be fixed by a computer looking at a base and comparing it to another database?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      So why are they doing it? If they already have the information, no need to collect it again, right?

      They want to see who else is with you. What you do at the airport. If you act "suspiciously". They want to have the opportunity to intercept you before you get to passport control.

  • Controlling exit has deeply sinister implications. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Eunomion ( 8640039 ) on Tuesday September 05, 2023 @08:12PM (#63826488)
    It's not a feature of a free country or an accountable government.

    • What you're saying is that no country in the world is free or has accountable governments. After all passport control exists.

      • Hardly in the way you're implying. Go to a land border between free countries and you will encounter border security for the country you're entering. You don't have to show documents for permission to depart. Airports are a little crazier about it, but you can still get cases of illegal migration by air.

        • Go to a land border between free countries and you will encounter border security for the country you're entering.

          Can you name a few "free countries"? Most of Europe is out because you'll need to do a passport check when you leave the Schengen.

          • It's not leaving Schengen that invokes document checks; it's entering somewhere else.

            Free governments only claim sovereignty over territory, not people.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by pjt33 ( 739471 )

          There are two possible ways of parsing "show documents for permission to depart". If you're talking about exit visas then it's true that they're more associated with authoritarian second world countries, but it's not clear how they're relevant to a discussion about facial recognition. If you're talking about having to show your ID documents to the border guards of the country you're leaving, there are exceptionally few countries which don't require that because they normally want to check whether you requir

          • A distinction with increasingly little difference. US border guards have no constitutional authority to demand documents from people leaving the country, as per the 4th Amendment. They can be on the lookout all they want, and detain someone they suspect of being a fugitive, but denying exit in lieu of papers would be patently illegal. Though it sounds like they're doing it anyway.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      COVID was a gift to those of us who don't like having our faces recognized by machines. A mask is often enough to defeat it, sunglasses optional.

  • This level of surveillance is criminal.

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close