US Immigration Implements Biometric-based Border

scubacuda writes "The NY Times reports (free registration) that immigrations officials are putting in place a sophisticated new identification system that uses ID cards encrypted with digital photos, signatures, biographical information and fingerprints that have been issued by the State Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Service by the millions over the last five years. "With more information systems, there are more opportunities for abuse," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which is pushing the government to release more information on its biometric plans."

Comments

George Orwell award

[LinuxXPHybrid]

This year's George Orwell award is going to whoever built this system? Well, congratulation!

Re:George Orwell award

[The_dev0]

I reckon. Why wate their time with this, when all they need is to start tattooing barcodes on our foreheads. Much more cost effective!

scary

[sickboy_macosX]

TOo bad Orwell's novel was not "2004" I mean i realize it is 2003 but think of what it is going to be like next year.

Re:scary

[_Pablo]

I guess that like most technology led projects, delays are the order of the day.

So if 1984 comes 20 years late, then 2001 isn't due for another 18 years - give the current rate of space odessey-ing that may even be a little optimisitic!

Foreign passports require biometrics?

[roybadami]

The most interesting (to me) comment in the article (which isn't elaborated further) is:

The legislation also requires foreign governments to use biometric technology in passports.

What if countries refuse? -- and I can't really see the rest of the world adding biometrics to their passports just becuase the US tells them to.

Being British, I don't currently require a visa for a short (up to 3 months?) visit to the US. I guess if Europe doesn't go along with these demands, I'm going to need a visa (which, presumably, will have biometrics embedded in it).

Re:Foreign passports require biometrics?

[ciderpunk]

What if countries refuse? -- and I can't really see the rest of the world adding biometrics to their passports just becuase the US tells them to.

The UK are intending to introduce biometric id cards - there's already been consultation (so called) about it. The US biometric thing was sited by David Blunkett as a reason for us needing them ... Details here

Re:Foreign passports require biometrics?

[roybadami]

Sorry about the dropped tag above.

Found another reference that might be of interest:

http://www.gunweek.com/archives/2002/hs090102.html

The countries that are members of the US visa waiver programme (allowing short stays in the US without a visa) are required to implement biometrics on all passports issued after October 2004, otherwise their citizens will be required to apply for a US visa in order to visit the US.

The article comments that the Irish are concerned about the possible damage to trade and tourism that would result from the reintroduction of visa requirements.

I'll be intrested to see how this turns out, but I think there'll be a public outcry here in the UK if there's an attempt to include biometrics on British passports.

So I guess I'll be needing a visa, then...

Re:Foreign passports require biometrics?

[front]

"but I think there'll be a public outcry here in the UK"

Public outcry in the UK rarely changes things unless it is accompanied by violent demonstrations in Trafalgar Square (Poll Tax demonstration). When the right-to-silence was removed by the British Parliament a few years back, the public outcry did nothing to change the situation.

The current crop of British politicians have recently decided to do whatever the US government tells them. If the US government tells them to include biometric data on UK passports then the British politicians will include it. The usual "post 9-11" anti-terrorist security reasons will be hauled out... a few "looney-left" politicos will raise some civil rights issues, the media will come down firmly on the side of the Home Office and you will not be needing a visa to enter the United States at all.

You may be "interested to see how this turns out" but I'm wondering why the result is not obvious to you...

cheers

front

and on a side note,

[Anonymous Coward]

that famous American puppet-state, Australia, is doing the same thing.

New trend in America?

[nfk]

It's an interesting change in the equation involving security and freedom; prior to September 11th, measures like this and the concentration of intelligence in one big department, and even things like the patriotic acts, would have been much more impopular. I live in a country (Portugal, in Europe) where citizens get an ID card when they are around 12. That would probably be considered inadequate and an invasion of privacy in the United States, but partly driven by the fear brought by the terrorist attacks and maybe also as a window of opportunity that politicians have taken advantage of, it is happening. I wonder what the sentiments of the majority of the population are.

Re:New trend in America?

[glesga_kiss]

It's an interesting change in the equation involving security and freedom

Welcome to Politics. Where people use just about anything to get what they want, with absolutely no respect for anyone else. For example, if a noteable shooting happens, the anti-gun lobby will sieze on that incident and use it to push their own agenda. Just like the incidents on Sept 11 are being used to push for these systems. They are not a reaction to any potential terrorist threat, certain people have been wanting these things for years. They are merely manipulating the public into thinking that it is neccessary. Democracy starts to fail when the government has the power to manipulate the public.

Do you think the souls who perished that day would be happy about the increasingly hypocritical "Land of the Free" turning into a police state? Where all your movements and communications are logged for all time? Where you are afraid to critizise the governent because it will increase your "terrorist rating" score on some automated system? Is that what "USA" means nowadays?

I am sorry, my American cousins, but your country is sliding down the crapper big time. It no longer stands for what it's supposed to, and it is a complete mockery of your constitution.

This isn't going to make the US

[Anonymous Coward]

any safer. Remember that the 911 terrorists had valid Saudi (and other) papers. This scheme would not have saved any lives had it been implemented before 911.

It smells like pork barrel to me.

Re:This isn't going to make the US

[KingJoshi]

This doesn't solve any problem but it can be part of the solution.

There are over 10 million illegal aliens in the U.S. Most of them are overstays. The government needs to check on foreigners every now and then to see if they're still legal. They didn't use to and still dont, that's why you have so many now. If they don't, the people will find a way to survive here illegally.

So what can the government do to/for the 10 million aliens? Many of which are hard working individuals that pay taxes. If the govenment gives Amnesty, then that only encourages more people to overstay or cross the border illegally.

Also, as long as there is that great a economic disparity between Mexico and the United States, Mexicans will continue to find ways to come here. Unless the US puts up a wall, they'll keep sneaking in. There were talks of giving Mexicans identification cards so they could work, open bank accounts, etc. in the U.S. Talks were progressing well until 9-11. President Vicente Fox and the Mexicans are happy with Bush right now.

First, the government should issue these cards to all foreigners and keep a tab on them. They've put the laws in the books, we'll see how well they enforce it. They also need to cooperate with Mexico. The IRS, INS and FBI need to combine databases properly. They can check for terrorists, watch flow of money, make sure to illegals are working, etc. Then, after a few years with better situation in the border of Mexico and having the foreigner issue better handled, they should give amnesty to the illegal aliens already here that haven't committed felonies. Give them proper papers to start their process of becoming permanent residents.

Unfortunately, that'll still be too late for me. I still find it odd that though I've been here 17 years (age 23) and I can't get my legal status fixed while some lucky bastard can win a lottery and get a green card to the U.S. The final thing they need to do is clarify the laws so that people can know how to stay in-status and all that. I've gone to several immigration lawyers and specialists and that disagree or aren't sure about things.

Re:On a lighter note...

[Pharmboy]

During a trip to an INS regional office, I was briefly shown the green card printing machine. (The cards aren't green and they look similar to a drivers licence.)

Taped to the window was a very official looking green card for a Mrs. Janet Reno.

So the system is for aliens not from this planet, too?

A new target for distributed computing

[supersat]

From reading the article, it appears that the information on the card isn't stored in a central database, but is instead stored directly on the card in an encrypted form. Imagine the chaos if the encryption algorithm and key were discovered. Free entry for everyone!

UK got there first

[panurge]

The UK has been using biometrics for immigration controls for many years. Immigration uses an advanced system known as "skin color recognition".

You're white - welcome to Britain!

Re:UK got there first

[roybadami]

I lived there for 7 years. I like multicultural cities, and I really dislike drunken, abusive, shaven headed white Brits. But I was talking about border controls, and I gather even the UK immigration service admits many of its officers are racists - but they can't replace them because (a)it takes time to train people, and (b)what decent person who wants a career wants to join an organisation stuffed with racists?

Things certainly seem to be better than they used to be. British citizens returning to Britain generally have a pretty easy time entering the country. A check of the passport is all that is done, and they process is quick enough that it's rare that any words are spoken by either side.

As a British-born British Citizen who is of half Asian descent, I used to find (10 or 15 years ago) that the immigration staff were always 'friendlier' to me than to my white friends or collegues: 'How are you?', 'Did you have a good journey?', etc.

Clearly the colour of my skin was a cue to engage in some idle smalltalk to check whether I spoke English (or perhaps just to check whether I had a British accent).

I certainly haven't encountered this pracise in the last five years, even though it used to be the norm....

big deal

[the_2nd_coming]

it is an imigration tool. if you are here on a temporary visa then you should be tracked while you are in the country....why should a visa holder be trusted? yes I sound paranoid but think about it...if you let strange people into your house everyday so they can use the phone or the bathroom would you not watch them to make sure they actualy go in the bathroom and watch them while they are on the phone?

Good.

[d_engberg]

National borders have used identification credentials (passports) with a second-factor biometric (photographs) for decades. The difference is that the old biometric was analog, and was performed manually by a customs agent, and the new one is digital.

The slashdot crowd should get up in arms about places where biometrics are used where governments/corporations have no right or requirement of knowing exactly who you are. Disneyland shouldn't need my fingerprint to sell me a ride on Magic Mountain.

Border crossings are a case where the governments absolutely SHOULD know exactly who you are. That's the entire point of something like a passport, and a second or third authentication factor will only help make this identification more accurate.

This is a completely separate issue from whether those resulting biometrics should be stored in a linked database that is accessible for law enforcement. This should be addressed through legislation, or biometrics should be chosen that would not directly help in law enforcement (e.g. iris scans, hand geometry, etc.).

Consider the reversal / mirrored situation :

[aepervius]

Why should US people going in other country be trusted ? Let us force the US have biometric Visa and passeport with finger print, saliva sample, skin and DNA sample, hair sample all on a chip, face recognition on 100 points etc... How would you think the US epople would react that the EU ask that from them ? I seriously doubt that most of you would accept this lightly without heavy protest.