CBP, Facial Recognition and Escorting

[mike carey]

There has been an active discussion of CBP's apparent use of facial recognition technology to target escorts (and potentially clients) at the US border, and their possible harvesting of facial images from sites like Rent Men to do so. This conversation has been taking place in a thread about the extent to which posting images of his face in his ad on RM will affect the number of clients he attracts. The CBP discussion is detracting from the intended subject of the thread, and what CBP might do is not a topic relevant to hiring but belongs here in the Lounge.

[Just Chuck]

I visited Big Bend National Park recently and drove through a CBP checkpoint coming back north away from the border, just south of Alpine, TX. I was surprised by the number of cameras and other kinds of electronic sensing equipment that were aimed at me and my vehicle when I pulled up.  

Google Maps

GOO.GL

---

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

 

[Bokomaru]

Facial recognition is being used by the government in many ways. I don’t even present a passport when entering the US, only facial recognition is used. I never officially gave the government  my facial biometrics. They took it without asking, unlike fingerprints, where you know what’s going on. 
 

Although many of the well informed forum members here will know this, I’d like to point out that if you are flagged at the border when entering the US, due to possible “sex trafficking,” potentially working while on a tourist visa, or for any other reason:

If you are not a US citizen you have basically no rights. Your phone can be confiscated and you have no legal right to privacy. 
 

If you are a citizen you unfortunately also have no right to privacy. Your phone can be confiscated and searched. 
 

HOWEVER, if your phone has a passcode, you cannot be forced to provide that passcode. It is tantamount to self incrimination. Authorities can however use your phone’s facial recognition or fingerprint recognition to unlock the phone and search it. 
 

Bottom line, turn off your phone’s auto unlock feature when entering the country. Normal privacy standards for searching a phone do not exist when entering the US. 

[mike carey]

2 minutes ago, Bokomaru said:

I never officially gave the government  my facial biometrics. They took it without asking, unlike fingerprints, where you know what’s going on.

You gave them a photo to put in your passport, that's all they needed to enable them to use those biometrics for you to re-enter the country. As a foreigner I have to give them my finger prints to enter the US. You are at least spared that!

[Archangel]

The government knows or can find out way more on any of us than we could even fathom.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Bokomaru said:

Facial recognition is being used by the government in many ways. I don’t even present a passport when entering the US, only facial recognition is used. I never officially gave the government  my facial biometrics. They took it without asking, unlike fingerprints, where you know what’s going on. Although many of the well informed forum members here will know this, I’d like to point out that if you are flagged at the border when entering the US, due to possible “sex trafficking,” potentially working while on a tourist visa, or for any other reason:

If you are not a US citizen you have basically no rights. Your phone can be confiscated and you have no legal right to privacy. 
 

If you are a citizen you unfortunately also have no right to privacy. Your phone can be confiscated and searched. ..

Do you have Global Entry? If you go through via facial recognition only, I suspect you may have Global Entry, in which case you gave them your biometrics when you went in and applied for the program. That's all I needed when I last came into the US (in late May). My fiance, however, does not have Global Entry, and had to show his passport (Charlotte Airport), though the process was pretty fast. It is true that when entering the US, one is not protected by the usual Constitutional protections for unreasonable search and seizure. However, the Constitutional protections against self-incrimination still apply. You are not required to answer questions, and I would personally suggest that if you're pulled in for interrogation, and aren't sure you can quickly resolve the matter (i.e. are pretty sure you're guiltless), I would simply state you don't want to answer any questions until you've had to opportunity to speak with an attorney. 

[Bokomaru]

11 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

Do you have Global Entry? If you go through via facial recognition only, I suspect you may have Global Entry, in which case you gave them your biometrics when you went in and applied for the program. That's all I needed when I last came into the US (in late May). My fiance, however, does not have Global Entry, and had to show his passport (Charlotte Airport), though the process was pretty fast. It is true that when entering the US, one is not protected by the usual Constitutional protections for unreasonable search and seizure. However, the Constitutional protections against self-incrimination still apply. You are not required to answer questions, and I would personally suggest that if you're pulled in for interrogation, and aren't sure you can quickly resolve the matter (i.e. are pretty sure you're guiltless), I would simply state you don't want to answer any questions until you've had to opportunity to speak with an attorney. 

Indeed, Global Entry. Facial recognition wasn’t in use when I applied.  They took my picture and fingerprints. I would not have considered a simple photo a method of biometric tracking at the time. Years later with no warning or notification, facial recognition was was implemented. Facial recognition is quite different from any other method since it means you can be easily spotted and identified from afar. It’s creepy. And of course ripe for abuse, as well as depressingly common. 

[Guest]

 

Just now, Bokomaru said:

Indeed, Global Entry. Facial recognition wasn’t in use when I applied.  They took my picture...

Well, isn't that a contradiction? When you applied, you consented to use of biometrics. 

[marylander1940]

10 hours ago, mike carey said:

There has been an active discussion of CBP's apparent use of facial recognition technology to target escorts (and potentially clients) at the US border, and their possible harvesting of facial images from sites like Rent Men to do so. This conversation has been taking place in a thread about the extent to which posting images of his face in his ad on RM will affect the number of clients he attracts. The CBP discussion is detracting from the intended subject of the thread, and what CBP might do is not a topic relevant to hiring but belongs here in the Lounge.

Let's focus all the conversation on this subject on here and avoid hijacking other threads.

 

Edited July 21, 2023 by marylander1940

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Just Chuck said:

I visited Big Bend National Park recently and drove through a CBP checkpoint coming back north away from the border, just south of Alpine, TX. I was surprised by the number of cameras and other kinds of electronic sensing equipment that were aimed at me and my vehicle when I pulled up.  

Actually, I was surprised by how poorly-guarded the border is at BBNP. I went there in April of 2021 with "Diego," the man I dated briefly when I first moved to LA (he's a dual US-Mexican citizen and also is enrolled in the SENTRI program, which I'm not, as I have only Global Entry). We waded across the Rio Grande, as did lots of other people. I saw a Mexican rancher openly take his cattle over to graze on the US side, as well as a number of Mexican nationals sell their wares on the US side of the river. These people may all have had some appropriate document, such as a visa, SENTRI card, Border Crossing Card, etc., but they certainly didn't have to show such documents to anyone. The Mexican town of Boquillas del Carmen borders the park, and it's not tough to enter the US from there without showing documents, though we were carrying necessary documents just in case (a passport card in my case, a SENTRI card in his case). The secondary checkpoints, such as that in Alpine, would require documents be shown. That being said, I believe that if you claim to be a US citizen when going through secondary checkpoints, they're not supposed to be able to ask you for documentation. 

Edited July 21, 2023 by Unicorn

[Guest]

[Bokomaru]

1 hour ago, Unicorn said:

 

Well, isn't that a contradiction? When you applied, you consented to use of biometrics. 

I would argue that recording my voice for ID purposes or using LiDAR or other means to enable facial recognition, or obtaining DNA should all involve active consent. They did it surreptitiously IMO. It’s possible that some T&C fine print enables it. That doesn’t make it right. Facial recognition is particularly dangerous in the wrong hands. 

[Archangel]

1 hour ago, Bokomaru said:

Facial recognition is particularly dangerous in the wrong hands. 

Whose hands do you fear and what do you fear they’ll do?

[+ jessmapex]

In the age of AI and ubiquitous cameras any expectation of privacy/anonymity in public places is useless. It's now truly a global village. Everyone in the village knows everyone else, what they are up to and what they might do next. 

[+ tassojunior]

15 hours ago, mike carey said:

There has been an active discussion of CBP's apparent use of facial recognition technology to target escorts (and potentially clients) at the US border, and their possible harvesting of facial images from sites like Rent Men to do so. This conversation has been taking place in a thread about the extent to which posting images of his face in his ad on RM will affect the number of clients he attracts. The CBP discussion is detracting from the intended subject of the thread, and what CBP might do is not a topic relevant to hiring but belongs here in the Lounge.

The OP had originally posted a thread asking, given the recent reports of the US government having a data base of photos taken from Rentmen, whether he should delete photos and followed up with the newest thread saying he was thinking of keeping his photos off because of the new prevalence of facial recognition and Rentmen being considered a "foreign sex-trafficIng site" by the US government,. I advised him privately after the first thread and advised him in the new thread that most escorts I know are partially blocking their faces now to thwart facial recognition harvesting. 

What concerns me most as an attorney is that in the video of the one English guy who was detained he clearly says the interrogating officer told him "you were on a foreign sex-trafficking website we are monitoring" referring to Rentmen. Whatever search they may have later done of his phone or computer, he was pulled out for having been on Rentmen (he has no doubt of this either). Various other reports of this facial-recognition from Rentmen use to pull foreigners out of line are rampant but obviously, most people don't want to discuss sexual accusations. "Sex-trafficking" is the magic words that get you an orange jumpsuit for life as the owners of BackPage and Rentboy know well. So far the government has only imprisoned owners of escort sites but they can't touch Rentmen or Rentmasseur because they are in Europe (they would in a heartbeat if they could). Now they are detaining and turning back through facial recognition individuals who have ever been on Rentmen for moral (not work) reasons. 

The multitude of providers now partially covering their face is perfectly natural and they know what they hear from others and act accordingly. I personally don't trust RM photos much anyway. I'd never meet just on those photos. But with hiring being considered sex-trafficking now I don't trust the government (again) to only try to jail owners of such sites or to only stop foreigners who are "on" Rentmen as providers. Especially not with elections coming up.  Mass surveillance is now the norm not exception and it's extremely easy for the government to link names with photos and ip addresses. "On a sex-trafficking website" is the big red flag of federal criminal law to beware of and be careful for everyone dealing with it. 

Edited July 21, 2023 by tassojunior

[Archangel]

Some of this talk sounds like paranoia to me, to be honest. That’s my opinion anyhow.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Bokomaru said:

I would argue that recording my voice for ID purposes or using LiDAR or other means to enable facial recognition, or obtaining DNA should all involve active consent. They did it surreptitiously IMO...

Wow. When I applied for the program, it was very clear to me why the photos and fingerprints were being taken: I provide them with that data in exchange for avoiding to wait in line upon entering the country. It literally takes only a few seconds (still have to wait for the luggage to come in, though). I find it rather off-base to call that surreptitious. 

[Archangel]

Can someone explain to me what were afraid of here exactly?

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, Archangel said:

Can someone explain to me what were afraid of here exactly?

The concern would be that an adult who offers his services as an escort, or the person who hires him, could be labeled a "sex trafficker" under today's insane definitions. 

[Archangel]

2 hours ago, Unicorn said:

The concern would be that an adult who offers his services as an escort, or the person who hires him, could be labeled a "sex trafficker" under today's insane definitions. 

I have a feeling, no evidence, but a feeling the fear far outweighs the risk.

Like I said in the other thread…

”As to not sharing face pictures because of law enforcement concerns for international travel, I don’t understand why that’s an issue for low-profile escorts. There are porn stars on those sites who plaster their international travels all social media, complete with checking in over the platform, and they continue to live the high life, face pictures and all else for the world to see on their escort profiles. So the notion that law enforcement is out on some kind of driven quest to track down male escorts traveling internationally seems a tad overblown to me. But hey – it’s just me.”

[Bokomaru]

5 hours ago, Unicorn said:

Wow. When I applied for the program, it was very clear to me why the photos and fingerprints were being taken: I provide them with that data in exchange for avoiding to wait in line upon entering the country. It literally takes only a few seconds (still have to wait for the luggage to come in, though). I find it rather off-base to call that surreptitious. 

Yes I freely gave my photo and fingerprints. That’s quite different agreeing to facial recognition which enables monitoring of my movements anywhere there’s a publicly accessible  camera. We don’t live in China. Ideally the US government SHOULD be above such things.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, Bokomaru said:

Yes I freely gave my photo and fingerprints. That’s quite different agreeing to facial recognition which enables monitoring of my movements anywhere there’s a publicly accessible  camera. We don’t live in China. Ideally the US government SHOULD be above such things.

Do you have evidence they're using the data anywhere other than at CBP entry points? I would think that kind of info would leak to the press. If you visit China, your photo will be taken (as it is in many other countries), and there you will be followed. 

[+ sync]

14 hours ago, Archangel said:

Whose hands do you fear and what do you fear they’ll do?

 

11 hours ago, Archangel said:

Can someone explain to me what were afraid of here exactly?

 

13 hours ago, Archangel said:

Some of this talk sounds like paranoia to me, to be honest. That’s my opinion anyhow.

 

 CREATES DATA VULNERABILITIES

There is also concern about the storage of facial recognition data, as these databases have the potential to be breached.

Hackers have broken into databases containing facial scans collected and used by banks, police departments and defence firms in the past. If a threat actor got hold of facial data that pertained to a victim’s phone, or was linked to information about them on a banking database, they could seize the key to escalating the breach further and accessing even more sensitive information.

 PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR FRAUD AND OTHER CRIMES

Lawbreakers can use facial recognition technology to perpetrate crimes against innocent victims too. They can collect individuals’ personal information, including imagery and video collected from facial scans and stored in databases, to commit identity fraud.

With this information, a thief could take out credit cards and other debt or open bank accounts in the victim’s name. In consideration of the aforementioned use of facial recognition to place shoplifters on criminal databases, threat actors could even place individuals on a criminal record.

Beyond fraud, bad actors can harass or stalk victims using facial recognition technology.

For example, stalkers could perform reverse image searches on a picture taken in a public place to gather information about their victims, to better persecute them.

Facial recognition law has lagged behind potential use by bad actors in recent years, which has prompted calls from rights groups for stricter biometrics regulations, to extend to technologies such as live facial recognition.

(Source:  ITPro, May 02, 2023)

[Archangel]

It seems to me there are two things going on here…

1. Having a picture on a potentially compromising site used by the government to prosecute a targeted quest against folks like escorts, under the guise if sex trafficking, but really about morality.

2. Having technology collect biometric data ans use it against us in any and all malicious ways, such as the above cited work of hackers.

 I find the idea that hackers would use online data in a malicious way more compelling than the sex trafficking angle.

But anyone who has any social media with their photo already provide such a trove to hackers. Show of hands who has social media with photos of themselves…

[+ tassojunior]

I've noticed more headless guys on RM in the US now too. I would think that could hurt business. In Czech, where the face-blurring started immediately after the US CBP incidents they have it finessed to an art now and are good at making it so as not to hide their looks much while evading facial recognition. Surely anyone who knows them would recognize them so it's obviously against facial recognition.

A few instructive examples: (the last 5 are all Invictus from his ad)