DHS To Grab Biometric Data From Green Card Holders

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Nextgov: "The Homeland Security Department has announced plans to expand its biometric data collection program to include foreign permanent residents and refugees. Almost all noncitizens will be required to provide digital fingerprints and a photograph upon entry into the United States as of Jan. 18. A notice (PDF) in Friday's Federal Register said expansion of the US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US VISIT) will include 'nearly all aliens,' except Canadian citizens on brief visits. Those categories include permanent residents with green cards, individuals seeking to enter on immigrant visas, and potential refugees. The US VISIT program was developed after the Sept.11, 2001 terrorist attacks to collect fingerprints from foreign visitors and run them against the FBI's terrorist watch list and other criminal databases. Another phase of the project, to develop an exit system to track foreign nationals leaving the country, has run into repeated setbacks." Reader MirrororriM points out other DHS news that they're thinking about monitoring blogs for information on terrorists.

Comments

Re:Great... How much longer till 1984?

[jcr]

This doesn't effect me as I am a citizen.

I disagree. Tolerating routine violations of privacy for one class of people desensitizes us to routine violations of privacy for everyone.

Thankfully, with Obama becoming president, the odds of you getting Gitmo'd have reduced drastically.

The odds were always far lower than the odds of getting killed by a drunk driver, but that's beside the point. The problem is that our government has gotten away with imprisoning people without charges for the first time since the Roosevelt administration, and the public outcry was negligible.

-jcr

Immigration experiences to US - prints, bah.

[Zarhan]

I've been to the US numerous times, all on business trips (I get paid to travel there). Anyway, back in 2003, Dallas, on first trip ever, I was basically waved through...not so bad even coming with an completely empty, unstamped passport.

Unfortunately, ever since then, on multiple trips (Immigration checks at NYC, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston) the fingerprints have been the least annoying part.

When the US-VISIT scheme was introduced, I went through the DHS website and looked into the privacy and data storage implications. Basically the PDF docs on the site showed such a horrendous architecture that I was pretty confident that my fingerprints will be safe in bowels of a system that probably won't ever really work (and I'm not a US taxpayer so I don't care that much where their money goes).

This was confirmed on my arrival to PHL - I thought that since I've been on multiple visits before that the officer probably has all my info on her screen the moment she wipes my (machine-readeable, not yet biometric) passport.

Guess what? I have scandinavian letters in my name (ääääööö). The officer asked me under what name I'd like to enter the US - should she type in my name with ä => ae or ä => a conversion. I gave the ä => a version since that's what everyone is in reality using... but kinda felt a bit let down of the awesome border security procedures...I'm starting to realize where all the Usama/Osama problems stem from. I thought that they'd at least use, say, the passport number if not the "code" field as primary key...At least if on some trip I land in trouble I can just claim "No, it's just a misspelled name, I'm really that other guy..."

Point I'm getting here: Fingerprints are minor piece of annoyance that add a bit to the travelers problems. For me, the privacy implications were pretty well addressed by DHS docs. The guy that interviews you at the border is the first person who you meet in foreign country - it's his behavior that gives the first impression.

The annoying part has been the attitude of almost all occasions I've basically felt that arrogance of "YOU ARE NOTHING, WHY THE HELL SHOULD I LET YOU IN, you pitiful European". Some vindication came on the last time in:

I was recently in Minneapolis IETF, and went through Chicago again (to change planes to Minneapolis). I don't know whether it was "economy is down, this foreign guy might bring in some serious money" or the fact that it was Obama's home town and everyone was still in great post-election mood and they forgot to be jackasses - but the guy at the desk was really nice. He ofc asked all the same questions as every other time - where I'm going and why - but the attitude made me actually feel welcome to the US. He basically apologized that they have to these days take the whole hand (prints from all fingers) but also said how much better the reader is compared to old one, told me that if I'm planning to spend any time in Chicago he could name a couple of good steakhouses - before stamping my passport and sending me on to the baggage carousel.

Now, timewise it wasn't any faster than any previous visits - same 5 minutes to process me - but I actually felt a bit happy after 16-hour flight (with transfers).

Mind you, I've gotten the "I'm welcome" feeling in EVERY other country I've visited, ever. At all borders they've acquired the same information - why I'm there, when I'm leaving and what I'm planning to do - but I'll be glad to visit Canada, UK, Thailand, Japan, Australia, NZ, and even Russia again - as a tourist, spending my own money.

If I'll get the same experience on my subsequent US business trips as I got on my latest one, I might actually come in again as a tourist, bring friends, and spend some of my own money, too.

Re:US citizens will be next?

[flajann]

In my State, you have to give your picture for ID, but you can instruct the State NOT to keep said picture on record.I kinda like that. One of the many reasons I love New Hampshire.

Re:I think you are missing the point

[Alex Belits]

In USSR, all citizens were supposed to carry their passports at all times, and show them to the police and other authorities whenever they demanded to see it, or face detention. It's like having to have a driver's license while driving, only for just being there.

No. Who told you that?

For example, my friends who chose to wear their hair long learned to never forget their passport at home.

Your "friends" lived in USSR in early 60's when things like that still bothered cops? Then passports wouldn't help them.

In major cities like Moscow, your passport had to have a stamp permitting you to live in that city, or you had to have papers showing that you are there on business. You could not just come to Moscow and live there, you needed a permission and that stamp.

That's propiska, residence registration, you moron. It means that you have an apartment or house in the city. Government provided apartments for token rent, so when you moved to another city you had to go through official channel exchanging apartments, buying a house or getting employer/school-sponsored one. People didn't have to spend anything significant on rent -- having a place to live was considered a basic right, however having it in, say, center of Moscow, obviously was not.