Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DHS Will Use Facial Recognition To Scan Travelers at the Border (engadget.com)

Posted by msmash on from the it's-here dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Last year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) put out a notice, saying it was looking for a facial recognition system that could work with images taken of people inside their cars. The idea was that such a system could be used to scan people entering and leaving the country through the US/Mexico border and match them to government documents like passports and visas. Now, The Verge reports that DHS will be launching a test of a system aiming to do just that. The Vehicle Face System, as it's called, is scheduled for an initial deployment in August and it will be installed at the Anzalduas border crossing. The test will take place over one year and will aim to take images of passengers in every car that enters or leaves the US through the crossing.

13 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. I have a question by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    What exactly would this do that a passport wouldn't? If you want to know who someone is, tada, passport.

    1. Re:I have a question by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      What exactly would this do that a passport wouldn't? If you want to know who someone is, tada, passport.

      Presumably, to speed up processing once travelers get to the checkpoint. From TFA: [bold mine]

      Those images will be matched to government documents and travelers will be verified before they get to the border checkpoint, in theory.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:I have a question by bmimatt · · Score: 4, Informative

      As someone who somewhat frequently crosses the border with Mexico by car in SoCal... You almost never need passport to drive to Mexico, you need it when/if you want to come back to the US. When you drive south, there is no US checkpoint of any kind, just some cameras and devices. One of these definitely is a plate reader, the rest I do not know. Once you are past that, you drive through the Mexican checkpoint, which picks cars at random for inspection. Green light - you keep going, red - you pull over and Mexican border agent comes over for a quick chat.

    3. Re:I have a question by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      This is the primary use. They already use other automated targeting devices in advance of you arriving at the border as well(such as license plate scanners). Secondarily, it will help tracking smugglers, capturing people with falsified documents, identify people with criminal records/people who have been deported, etc.

    4. Re:I have a question by Nkwe · · Score: 4, Funny

      There's 7" or so fence in places you can see from the car when getting out of / returning to Mexico.

      Is there also a model of Stonehenge?

    5. Re:I have a question by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With facial recognition systems, the more sample photos of a subject you have, the better it works. A lot better than having just one passport picture.

      The DHS folks want to build a bigger database that allows law enforcement folks to better identify criminal folks from surveillance cameras.

      This.

      It's about building facial databases which can be shared among the various Federal. and State agencies and departments.

      If anyone thinks it will only be used to identify and track "criminals" and not journalists, whistle blowers, political enemies and more, they are fools.

      Couple this with AI using facial micro-expression analysis and you can quickly learn anything about anyone, how someone will react to a given situation, their strengths & weaknesses, if they're lying or telling the truth, what makes them angry, sad, happy, what scares them, or makes them laugh, cry...or kill.

      The more data/images/video the AI has to work with, the more specific and precise the predictive ability and also conversely the ability to know what will manipulate individuals and groups to do, say, and believe whatever those in control desire.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    6. Re:I have a question by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      I thought you guys were building a big fucking fence to take care of this.

      --
      No sig today...
  2. In other news ... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

    sales of Ronald Reagan masks near the border are up 1000%.

  3. Might be true, but this story says otherwise by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > no skin off of their nose if it costs you your last shreds of privacy, your firstborn, your tax dollars, or whatever else.

    Your name and passport number isn't private while crossing the border. Cameras and computers and cheaper than border guards. Seems to me this will cost fewer tax dollars and have roughly zero privacy impact.

    > doesn't matter that this adds nothing of value whatsoever. Competence, efficacy, cost-effectiveness, efficiency, are all irrelevant. They're made out of pure cover-your-assium. That is all.

    Seems more cost-effective to me. They have their problems, of course, as all government entities do. This doesn't seem like an example of any of that.

    The whole "within 100 miles of the border" thing they did a while back - THAT was fucked up.

  4. Welp. We're in a giant prison now. by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Title says it all.

  5. Re:Yet another reason... by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yet another reason not to visit the USA.

    Pretty much. I've got nothing to hide, but the ever-increasing security theater intensity makes me fearful. The odds of being incorrectly flagged as a person-of-interest are incredibly low, but the consequence of such an event is massive. The more hoops I have to jump through, the more the odds and the consequence increase.

    I live in a (Canadian) border town, but I basically don't cross anymore unless I'm going to the nearby US international airport to go somewhere else.

    Shopping in Detroit? Nope. Visiting heritage places in Michigan? Nope. Attending concerts at American venues? Nope. Conferences? Art shows? Air shows? Woodward Dream Cruise? Nope, nope, nope, nope.

    To my American friends... I live in a free nation. Coming to visit you is fucking frightening, what with the razor wire and bulletproof-vest-wearing-German-Shepherds, and the angry muscle agents with guns, and the cameras, and the cameras, and the what-the-fuck-is-that-thing scanners pointed at my car, and the simple fact that if I am misheard or misunderstood, my border-crossing "rights", along with my anus and my freedom are moment from being dramatically altered. You're nice people as people. But as a nation, your paranoia makes you scary to visit.

    --
    "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
  6. Fix the real problem by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 2

    Invest into businesses in Mexico and other countries so that the folks there get decent jobs that secure their outcome and generate a decent standard of living. That will be far cheaper than any border wall or facial recognition or other high tech toys.None of those who risk their lives coming to the US do that just for fun. If they no longer see a need to leave their home country the issue will mostly be resolved. It will also make it less likely that people see a career in the narcos as a viable path. I bet anyone would rather glue cars together than be constantly on the run.

  7. Re:Yet another reason... by Scroatzilla · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I live in a free nation" as in "free to follow politically correct compelled speech laws." No thank you, I'll stick to the *actually free* country.