Comments on: Border Biometrics: “Zero Benefit”?

By: The Technology Liberation Front Turns 5 Today!

The Technology Liberation Front Turns 5 Today! — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 04:37:30 +0000

[...] “ID Checks are About Control, Not Security” (2,870) and his look at “Border Biometrics” (2,402 [...]

By: foufa

foufa — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:24:28 +0000

Humilation? Come on now, on what extent are you being humiliated by biometric security??
Using VISA as if we dont belong in the EU isnt that humiliation?
I believe tha someone would feel uncomfortable with biometrics only if he is afraid of disclosing smt about his ID.
When you enter your company by using fingerprints , why dont u feel then humilated?!
It is all a matter of security. That means it's more efficient and effective to preclude incidents than accepting them and try to improve them after the incident has taken place! What if another 11/9 like event was to happen but was prohibited by the biometric system in place?! Maybe we would never be in the position to know whether the system was the one to inhibit the attack but i believe that even if there's a slight chance it would work like that, then we should accept it.
And OFCOURSE if there was another successful 11/9 like event then all of you would say that TSA and others didnt do what they should do, didnt employ strict policies even if these policies would be on the citizen's expense! It wouldnt matter how citizens feel about the security measures that are in place, you would say that what matters is the incident NOT TO TAKE PLACE!

"Like me, literally thousands of EU citizens." by Massimo

Yes but you do neglect many more thousands of EU citizens that MONTHLY travel to US and that's because they just feel secure with the new employed security systems.

By: foufa

foufa — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:24:28 +0000

By: foufa

foufa — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:24:28 +0000

By: Massimo

Massimo — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 13:54:17 +0000

I am another potential visitor in the same situation.
Citizen of a big EU member state, international civil servant and computing professional, I will not travel to the US unless I will receive assurances not to be treated as a common criminal.
You won't change your policy? Tough-I will not endure the useless humiliation.
Like me, literally thousands of EU citizens.
Already your border guards were uncivilised, even before 9/11.
Now it is just too much.

By: Urs

Urs — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 20:38:05 +0000

You forgot or neglected the visitors who won't visit your country because of this measure. People who decide to spend their money somewhere else. The number of such people might be negligible as well, but I am one of them. When my friend in the States ask me, when I will visit them again, I tell them: “not as long as I have to give my fingerprints at the border!”.

By: tadhg.com » Blog Archive » $15 Billion in Biometrics

tadhg.com » Blog Archive » $15 Billion in Biometrics — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:21:21 +0000

[...] only is it completely wrong-headed, it’s amazingly wasteful an expensive! Bruce Schneier and Jim Harper weigh [...]

By: x

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:52:05 +0000

Follow the money. Lots of money has been made by companies selling hardware and software for programs such as US-VISIT, etc.

By: RH

RH — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:44:28 +0000

There may be something "simpler" involved. Engineers (and others) are trained to simplify their equations. In general, we strike out anything which is "close enough to zero" and go back later if we find out that wasn't a fair assumption. While there is definitely a difference between zero and "almost zero," my experience is that supporting solutions which depend on them being different tends to result in solutions which are creaky at best =) though some situations do call for it.

In the case for government spending, I argue epsilon = 0 because making that (slightly false) statement makes it SO much easier for a senator to weigh his decision.

By: crack

crack — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:31:13 +0000

I think there may be some poetic license involved.

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:14:41 +0000

I agree that using biometrics on law violators is more appropriate. I don't think the assumption that illegal immigrants commit more crime (beyond the illegal entry) holds up, however. Here's a Reuters story from earlier this year about a study that touched on that question.

Among other findings in the report, non-citizen men from Mexico 18 to 40 -- a group disproportionately likely to have entered the United States illegally -- are more than eight times less likely than U.S.-born men in the same age group to be in a correctional institution (0.48 percent vs. 4.2 percent).

"From a public safety standpoint, there would be little reason to further limit immigration, to favor entry by high-skilled immigrants, or to increase penalties against criminal immigrants," the report said.

If you have countervailing evidence to share, that would be welcome, of course.

By: MikeRT

MikeRT — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:23:48 +0000

A better use for this program would be to track illegal immigrants in police custody. The police are more likely to have a need to track illegal immigrants than people who come into this country through normal channels like airports, since illegal immigrants tend to commit more crime than legal vistors and immigrants.