TSA’s Opt-In Facial Recognition Program Doesn’t Seem All That Optional In Real Life (original) (raw)

from the not-really-optional-when-only-one-option-works-like-it-should dept

Nearly a half-decade ago, the DHS began rolling out biometric scanning at international airports. The early efforts targeted foreign travelers, but it was always clear the DHS (and its underling, the TSA) ultimately desired facial recognition tech to be the status quo in US airports.

The slow rollout that began with scanning foreigners’ faces was the DHS’s intellectually dishonest Overton window. It wasn’t an attempt to see what people would tolerate if routinely subjected to unproven tech. Instead, it was meant to show people would put up with almost anything if their only other option was abandoning their travel plans and expensive airline tickets.

Having proven nothing more than people are willing to be subjected to ever-expanding surveillance programs in exchange for freedom of movement, the TSA has moved forward with its biometric scanning. It has quietly expanded its facial recognition program to US citizens and residents on domestic flights at 16 airports.

At this point, the program is still opt-in. The TSA clearly wants it to be the default option for travelers, but at the moment, it is not forcing fliers to verify their identity via its facial recognition kiosks. That being said, it’s not exactly making it clear to travelers that they’re not required to participate in the program in order to board flights. The less obvious the options, the less likely it is that travelers will choose options the TSA doesn’t prefer.

A TSA rep (Jason Lim) spoken to by the Washington Post claimed travelers who opted to go the usual route — presenting their ID to TSA agents rather than utilizing the kiosks — would not be subjected to worse service simply because they opted out.

“None of this facial recognition technology is mandated,” said Lim. “Those who do not feel comfortable will still have to present their ID — but they can tell the officer that they do not want their photo taken, and the officer will turn off the live camera.” There are also supposed to be signs around informing you of your rights.

[…]

_You should have no derogatory experience based on you exercising your right,” said Lim. If you suspect that has happened, the TSA says you should ask to speak to a manager._“

Without a doubt, TSA agents have been apprised of these developments, as well as their obligation to provide the same level of (presumably subpar) service to travelers deciding to bypass the facial recognition kiosks. Memos, emails, posters, etc. have presumably been passed on to TSA employees, advising them of their options when travelers decide to utilize something other than the TSA’s preferred ID verification option.

But what the TSA says and what it does are two very different things, as traveler YK Hong notes on Mastodon. The TSA spokesperson says travelers will be treated equitably, no matter their personal decision. The boots on the ground say otherwise. This is from YK Hong’s Mastodon thread:

Coming out of the flight there was a row of kiosks for facial biometric capture. There were no people. Just kiosks. So I kept walking.

The next point of contact was the passport agents at their desks. Agent A asked me, “Did you take your photo at the kiosk?” I said, “No, I am opting out of biometric facial recognition.” And the agent asked, “Why?”

First off, the “why” doesn’t matter. The program is still opt-in, which means TSA agents should expect far more people to bypass the kiosks than utilize them. As the TSA spokesperson stated, face scanning is not mandatory. So, if someone does not do something that is not mandated, they should not face additional hassling from government employees.

But that’s what YK Hong experienced. They were clear on their rights and obligations. It was the TSA that seemed ill-informed about the facial recognition rollout. The agent who had no right to ask why YK Hong had decided not to utilize the kiosks received an answer:

“Because I don’t like it”

No reason was needed. And this reason was good enough, especially since YK Hong was under no obligation to explain their decision. The question was repeated by the agent, since he clearly wasn’t satisfied with the answer he had no right to demand. YK Hong reiterated their stance on the issue, stating they were opting out. The agent directed YK Hong to read a sign that basically said they could do exactly what they had already done.

The sign read: “U.S. citizens and select foreign nationals who are not required to provide biometrics and who wish to opt out of the new facial biometric process may simply notify a CBP officer, request a manual document check, and proceed with processing consistent with existing requirements for entry into the United States.”

That should have been the end of it. The TSA agent should have asked for YK Hong’s ID, compared it with the person standing in front of him, and allowed them to continue on through the airport. Instead, it became a whole thing involving three TSA agents, only one of which appeared to possess any amount of common sense.

The TSA has, since its inception, verified ID with physical documents. That it now has another option doesn’t mean the original option no longer exists. Hong’s experience suggests the soft rollout of facial recognition tech has somehow wiped the minds of TSA employees, forcing them to forget how things used to be done before the implementation of this unproven tech.

Then agent C arrived at the adjoining desk to begin work. And agent B said, pointing at me, “She doesn’t want to do the face scan. Which manager do I call?”

Agent C then said, “You don’t have to call anyone. Just look at her face and then compare it to her passport photo.”

And I said, “Yes, how it used to be done just a year ago.”

And agent B said, “You’re my first opt out.”

Then agent C said, you just have to enter on the screen why she doesn’t want it.” So again, I said, “I don’t like the repetitive image capture.”

Agent B said, “You’re losing the advantages of going through quickly.” I said, “That’s fine.” He shook his head.

Finally, after a lot of fumbling on their end, I was able to proceed through.

All very stupid. All very depressing. And all very par for the course when it comes to federal agencies in the national security business.

You can see why the DHS and TSA would love to nudge people towards (human) contactless verification. It allows everyone to blame the machines, rather than the employees, when something goes wrong. The TSA obviously doesn’t trust its agents to make judgment calls during ID verification. And agents clearly feel they should never be asked to use their better judgment while providing their particularly useless form of travel security. Making regular people interface with machines allows everyone (but travelers) to pretend any blown calls are out of their hands — an unfortunate turn of events that will always be greeted by official (and officious) shrugs of “what are you gonna do” by public servants.

Was this interaction worse than feeding your face to a machine? Indubitably. And, despite TSA statements otherwise, this is how the DHS and TSA want it to be. Any amount of friction that encourages people to do what the government prefers rather than what’s in their own best interest is a win for the DHS. The option of bypassing grumpy people in ill-fitting uniforms who are incapable of utilizing common sense is just too tempting for most travelers. The surveillance state wins. And the wheels are greased for mission creep. And all because the government performs routine tasks so poorly most people will do whatever it takes to avoid interacting with the people agencies have placed on the front lines.

Filed Under: facial recognition, optional, tsa