Federal facial recognition for babies? How the border is fueling a surveillance state



Tech that recognizes faces, enabling the user to permanently track, say, you, is becoming ubiquitous — now a fixture of airport security, with stadiums the next big “market.” However, the full potential of facial recognition is unrealized due to a simple obstacle: children.

Now, in the name of border security, that may be about to change — for everyone.

“Facial recognition technology (FRT) has traditionally not been applied to children,” observed the MIT Technology Review in an extensive report this month, “largely because training data sets of real children’s faces are few and far between, and consist of either low-quality images drawn from the internet or small sample sizes with little diversity. Such limitations reflect the significant sensitivities regarding privacy and consent when it comes to minors.”

Democrats have abandoned the party’s historically anti-corporate, pro-civil-liberties core, which considered the strong central government to be the people’s only bulwark against systematic injustice and exploitation.

But the current thinking at the Department of Homeland Security, aired over the summer during at least one conference, suggests bureaucrats are committed to breaking the taboo on minor facial recognition. Despite denials that minor scanning is taking place, insiders approached by the Review warned that the practice could already be under way.

At June’s Federal Identity Forum and Exposition, a yearly confab drawing together government employees and contractors in what’s called the “identity management” space, the assistant director of the DHS Office of Biometric Identity Management — one John Boyd — openly speculated that the agency’s so-called craniofacial structural progression initiative could soon be applied “down to the infant” at locations where the United States government receives and processes immigrants.

“If we pick up someone from Panama at the southern border at age 4,” he asked, “and then pick them up at age 6, are we going to recognize them?”

But “the border” effectively transcends the line between the U.S. and Mexico stretching from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Since last year, according to the Review, Customs and Border Protection “has been using a mobile app, CBP One, for asylum seekers to submit biometric data even before they enter the United States. ... After crossing into the United States, migrants submit to collection of more biometric data, including DNA.” Citing a Georgetown Law School report, the Review tallies at least 1.5 million DNA profiles in the CBP One database, “primarily from migrants crossing the border, to law enforcement databases since it began collecting DNA 'from any person in CBP custody subject to fingerprinting' in January 2020.”

In stark terms, the “border” of the United States of America is becoming any place United States government technology digitally harvests the biometric identity of people considered to be entering or exiting its territory or jurisdiction.

The transformation raises intense questions about the constitutionality of the identity-based surveillance and tracking model to which this approach to “border” security applies — one that, it’s all too easy to see, can promptly be scaled to incorporate any and all Americans, especially those targeted politically by the government or singled out for suspicion and enhanced scrutiny.

For those on the political left, the use of the border to feed the biometric borg underscores how much establishment Democrats have abandoned the party’s historically anti-corporate, pro-civil-liberties core, which considered the strong central government to be the people’s only bulwark against systematic injustice and exploitation.

But for those on the political right, who have long considered heightened border security a necessity in reclaiming American sovereignty from established elites bent on flouting the rule of law to strengthen their political and economic interests, the border-to-borg pipeline dramatizes how leading-edge security technology is being used in ways the regime can and does repurpose to nullify constitutional protections for citizens, especially critics of the regime itself.

The DHS told MIT Tech Review it “ensures all technologies, regardless of type, are operated under the established authorities and within the scope of the law” while “protecting the privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties of all individuals who may be subject to the technology we use to keep the nation safe and secure.” What’s more, according to the statement, it “does not collect facial images from minors under 14 and has no current plans to do so for either operational or research purposes.”

Yet an anonymous former CBP official familiar with immigrant processing centers told the Review that each center he visited “had biometric identity collection, and everybody was going through it” without the facility “separating out children.”

Philadelphia’s Partnership With Democrat Data Firm Raises ‘Potential Legal Issues,’ Election Specialist Says

The Philadelphia mayor's office has been using a data-gathering software provider that works exclusively with the Democrat Party.

Politicians Who Refuse To Stop Big Tech’s Rabid Data Mining Are Complicit In Tyranny

Regulation will not be enough to stop Big Tech. We must also starve the beast that feeds on your private information and uses it against you.

Newly declassified letter warns CIA has conducted 'secret' program that collects 'bulk' data on Americans



The Central Intelligence Agency has used a "secret" program to collect data on American citizens in "bulk," according to a letter that was partially declassified on Thursday.

What are the details?

Two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee — Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Martin Heinrich (N.M.) — wrote CIA Director William Burns and National Intelligence Director Avril Haines in April 2021 expressing concern over the apparent unlawful data collection on American citizens.

The letter was released on Thursday with significant redactions.

The data collection is reportedly connected to counterterrorism intelligence, Bloomberg reported, and the program is being operated under Executive Order 12333. That executive order was signed by then-President Ronald Reagan in 1981.

But according to Wyden and Heinrich, the CIA "has secretly conducted its own bulk program" and "has done so entirely outside the statutory framework that Congress and the public believe govern this collection, and without any of the judicial, congressional or even executive branch oversight that comes with FISA collection."

"This basic fact has been kept from the public and from Congress. Until the [Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board] report was delivered last month, the nature and full extent of the CIA's collection was withheld even from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence," the senators added.

Unfortunately, the letter does not indicate, as Bloomberg noted, "how long, exactly, the surveillance had unfolded, how widespread it had been, or what sort of information was collected and from whom."

The CIA also released the PCLOB's report, which was heavily redacted. One of the problems the PCLOB, an internal government watchdog, noted was that when CIA analysts seek information that may be connected to U.S. citizens, "a popup box will appear to remind the analysts that an [foreign intelligence] purpose is required for such a query." However, the problem is that "analysts are not required to memorialize the justification for their queries."

What was the response?

In a joint statement, Wyden and Heinrich called for more transparency from the CIA about what data was collected and under what legal authority the collection happened.

"[W]hat these documents demonstrate is that many of the same concerns that Americans have about their privacy and civil liberties also apply to how the CIA collects and handles information under executive order and outside the FISA law," the senators also explained. "In particular, these documents reveal serious problems associated with warrantless backdoor searches of Americans, the same issue that has generated bipartisan concern in the FISA context."

Meanwhile, CIA privacy and civil liberties officer Kristi Scott said in a statement the spy agency is committed to respecting privacy and civil liberties.

"CIA recognizes and takes very seriously our obligation to respect the privacy and civil liberties of US persons in the conduct of our vital national security mission, and conducts our activities, including collection activities, in compliance with U.S. law, Executive Order 12333, and our Attorney General guidelines," Scott said. "CIA is committed to transparency consistent with our obligation to protect intelligence sources and methods."

‘Very Sad’: Ben Carson Criticizes Federal Vaccine Surveillance Expansion Bill

'We have got to be smart enough to recognize these signs when we see them and stop them, to nip them in the bud before it becomes too late,' Carson said. 'It doesn't take long to change a nation.'