By increasing the use of face recognition technology, customs authorities want to save time while also increasing security. But what about the right to privacy?
A biometrics expert weighs in on the debate.
After becoming more used to traveling during the epidemic, overseas tourists may encounter a new identification technology utilized by the United States Customs and Border Protection agency (CBP) upon their return home, which is biometric face recognition.
A recommendation by Congress’ 9/11 Commission to strengthen border security by using biometrics was implemented in 2018, and the CBP started scaling up the technology in 2019 under a program known as Simplified Arrival.
The government chose face recognition over other biometric measures available, such as iris scans and fingerprints, since it employs a computer algorithm to match a photograph taken in person at airport immigration or another border checkpoint with the traveler’s passport photo or visa.
C.B.P. deputy executive assistant commissioner Diane Sabatino, who is in charge of the biometric program, said, “We’ve automated a laborious procedure that was previously done by hand.”
Some privacy experts have expressed concern about the technology’s use. As part of their efforts to ensure fairness, Senators Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) wrote to the agency in January, requesting more information “to ensure that flagged individuals are treated in a safe, fair, and noninvasive manner given the imperfection of facial recognition software.”
The following are excerpts from an interview with Ms. Sabatino in which she discussed the concerns in more depth. They have been modified for length and clarity.
Table of Contents
What factors led to the selection of face recognition over other kinds of biometrics?
Because it is such a straightforward procedure, we chose face scanning as our biometric technology of choice after examining fingerprint, iris, and other forms of biometric technology.
Travelers introduce themselves and their paperwork, and then pose for a brief snapshot in a matter of moments. Because of a conversation with the traveler about the purpose of the trip, the officer has all of the information they need to determine whether or not additional investigation is necessary.
We may now take use of technology that is more capable of drawing comparisons. The officer retains the authority to make final decisions. Travelers have the option to decline.
What are some of the advantages of using technology?
It’s a simple and straightforward procedure. One advantage is that it allows police to be more efficient when establishing the purpose of trip. Additionally, it is more effective at spotting probable impostors. And the third aspect that we hadn’t considered was the additional health advantages.
Our security boost comes at a time and location when people are already required to identify themselves for identification verification, and now we’re adding touchless travel to the mix to help keep infections from spreading further.
It wasn’t something we had in mind while we were developing it, but it made perfect sense once we put it together.
What is the average amount of time a passenger will spend at inspection?
Manual verification might take anywhere between 10 and 30 seconds, depending on the situation. Because of the brightness, someone standing outdoors at a land boundary may have a more difficult time.
The verification process for face recognition technology is taking two to three seconds longer as we automate and enhance the technology. The match is just one of the tools available in the whole process.
However, that instrument does not make the judgment on whether a patient should be admitted or if additional investigation is required. It is the officer and the totality of the facts that determine the outcome. The first and most important consideration is security.
Approximately how many impostors has the technology discovered to date?
After deploying the technology, we have discovered around 300 impostors who have used it in the first three years, predominantly in the air passenger environment but also in the marine area to a lesser extent.
That does not rule out the possibility that we would have recognized them differently. It apprehended around 1,000 to 1,100 people during pedestrian land crossings along the southern land border in the previous year.
Digital technology, according to critics, will be exploited for spying. What measures do you have in place to protect your privacy?
The identification of persons at a time and location where they would ordinarily expect to present themselves for identity verification is the commercial use case for this technology. We are not gathering photographs from the internet or crawling social media sites. In this case, the individual is presenting their passport, and we have a repository from which we may draw images to create galleries in advance of their arrival, utilizing images from United States passports and individuals who have filed for visas.
As a result, we construct these galleries at airports and marine areas using information that has previously been submitted for identity verification purposes. We cross-reference it with the information we already have.
In addition, we are ensuring that there is safe encryption. When a gallery is built, a picture is not associated with any information and hence cannot be compromised by reverse engineering techniques. The design is based on the privacy safeguards that we were aware would need to be in place. Images of citizens of the United States are held for less than 12 hours, and in many cases for significantly shorter time.
How are you dealing with the possibility of unconscious bias in the programming, which might result in greater rates of mistakes for specific groups, such as persons of color, if the software is implemented?
That is absolutely something with which we are extremely familiar. In order to offer information about the program, we have teamed with the National Institute of Standards and Technology. When it comes to demographics, our high-performing algorithms show absolutely no discernible difference amongst themselves.
What method is used to notify tourists that they have the option to opt out?
Every point of entry has signs indicating that we are open. Individuals who choose to opt out must tell the officer at the time of inspection. After then, it would return to the manual method.
Is the technology available at all border crossings?
It is now being implemented in pedestrian lanes at land boundaries. With Simplified Arrival, we’re covering around 99 percent of the ground in the air environment. The last line of defense is the land boundary.
We’ve recently finished a 120-day pilot in the automobile lanes of Hidalgo, Texas, and we’ll be assessing the results soon after that. A 90 percent occupancy rate is achieved at cruise ports. The Port of Miami, Port Canaveral, and Port Everglades in Florida are among the eight ports of entry where we are collaborating with nine major airlines.
How do you respond to those who are skeptical about biometrics?
We appreciate the fact that privacy advocacy organizations are scrutinizing our actions. Ultimately, we want to be able to convey and share our narrative about the significant investment we’ve made in terms of privacy. There are so many fallacies and so much disinformation out there, associating what we do with surveillance, that it’s difficult to know where to start.
Whenever new technology is introduced, there are always good reasons to be concerned. We look forward to answering any queries you may have. When we are developing these systems, they assist us in providing better answers.