More Monday.
Tag Archives: department of homeland security
When Fraud Is Too Obvious, the TSA Edition
On Tuesday I will write about a way to combat document signature fraud, but today I will focus on extremely obvious fraudulent activity.
You probably haven’t tried to alter your appearance before going through an airport security checkpoint, but it’s hard to pull off.
The most obvious preventive measure is that airport security uses multi factor authentication. Even if the woman in the video encountered a dumb Transportation Security Administration (TSA) expert who thought she truly was Richard Nixon, the driver’s license “Nixon” presented would fail a security check.
But not all fraud is this easy to detect. Not for job applicants, not for travelers.
Modern Airport Identity Security: mDLs at TSA at ONT
Today’s acronyms are TSA, ONT, and mDL.
I finally found a legitimate use for my California mobile driver’s license (mDL) this afternoon.
Ontario International Airport (ONT) allows people without tickets to reserve a day pass to see departing passengers off. The day pass functions as the equivalent of a real passenger’s boarding pass…with appropriate identification.
Both the day pass and my mDL were in my smartphone wallet, so all went smoothly. I wasn’t paying enough attention to know if the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) compared my live face to my mDL, but they probably did.
And I can confirm that Richard Reid rule is gone: no shoe removal required. Belts are another matter.
No true pictures, just an artistic re-creation.
Icing Translations With Axon
The first paragraph of this Newsweek article is puzzling:
“Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) no longer requires new recruits to take a five-week Spanish-language training program, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).”
Until you get to the fourth:
“Axon, a company with a $5.1 million contract to provide Homeland Security with body-worn cameras, advertises that its latest body camera includes real-time “push-to-talk voice translation” in more than 50 languages.”
You may know Axon by its former name, TASER International. Needless to say, its product line has evolved.
Newsweek: https://www.newsweek.com/ice-immigration-spanish-language-new-recruits-2114110
Axon: https://www.axon.com/products/real-time-translation
(Picture from Axon)
Using Personal Devices at Work: Meta AI Smart Glasses at a CBP Raid?
Although the lines inevitably blur, there is often a line between devices used at home and devices used at work.
- For example, if you work in an old-fashioned work office, you shouldn’t use the company photocopier to run personal copies of invitations to your wedding.
- Similarly, if you have a personal generative AI account, you may cause problems if you use that personal account for work-related research…especially if you feed confidential information to the account. (Don’t do this.)
The line between personal use and work use of devices may have been crossed by a Customs and Border Protection agent on June 30 in Los Angeles, according to 404 Media.
“A Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent wore Meta’s AI smart glasses to a June 30 immigration raid outside a Home Depot in Cypress Park, Los Angeles, according to photos and videos of the agent verified by 404 Media.”
If you visit the 404 Media story, you can see zoomed in pictures of the agent’s glasses showing the telltale signs that these aren’t your average spectacles.
Now 404 Media doesn’t take this single photo as evidence to indicate that CBP has formally adopted Meta AI glasses for its work. In fact, a likely explanation is that these were the agent’s personal glasses, and he chose to wear them to work that day.
And 404 Media also points out that current Meta AI glasses do NOT have built-in facial recognition capabilities.
But even with these, the mere act of wearing these glasses causes potential problems for the agent, for Customs and Border Protection, and for Meta.
- For the agent, he may have been in violation of Meta’s applicable Terms of Service, which state (Clause 2.1): “You may only use MPT Products for personal non-commercial purposes unless otherwise expressly permitted in these Supplemental Terms or authorized by us in writing.” Using the glasses during an immigration raid is NOT a personal purpose.
- For Customs and Border Protection, this may be a political hot potato. Even within the group of supporters of Donald Trump, there is a clear division regarding the use of facial recognition technologies (not the case here, but it could be). Some are all for using any technology whatsoever without restraint. Others see these technologies as dangerous, never to be used. Congress is currently considering H.R. 3782, “To prohibit the Federal Government from using facial recognition technology as a means of identity verification, and for other purposes.” Some Members of Congress may have some questions for this CBP agent.
- For Meta, this could cause problems with its customers. Most of the “Really Big Bunch” has shied away from providing biometric technology to law enforcement and homeland security, primarily because many of its consumer customers would have a fit. But what if Meta is cooperating with the Government and doesn’t even know that it is?
Take Grandma, who uses Meta to find those cute Facebook stories about that hunk Ozzy Osbourne (who appeals to an older demographic). If she finds out that her friend Marky Mark Zuckerberg is letting the Government use Meta technology on those poor hardworking workers who just want a better life, well, Grandma may stop buying those trinkets from Facebook Marketplace.
So the lesson learned? Don’t use personal devices at work. Especially if they’re controversial.
FBI, DoD, DHS, and Other Biometric Standards
(Imagen 4)
When I started in biometrics 30 years ago, the most important operational biometric standard to me was what was then called the Electronic Fingerprint Transmission Specification or EFTS, published by the Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
Unlike the ANSI/NIST biometric data interchange standard, the EFTS can actually be used out of the box to transmit data. The ANSI/NIST standard doesn’t define any “Type 2” fields, nor does it define any “types of transactions” (TOTs). EFTS did.
Other standards
But the EFTS, now the FBI’s Electronic Biometric Transmission Specification or EBTS (downloadable here), isn’t the only biometric transmission standard derived from ANSI/NIST.
- State police agencies have their own law enforcement transmission standards. Here’s New York’s version (PDF).
- Other U.S. federal agencies such as the U.S. Departments of Defense and Homeland Security have transmission standards.
- Other countries have their own transmission standards.
- Multinational agencies such as INTERPOL have their own transmission standards.
Luckily all the different standards have some basic similarities, but if you have a mobile biometric device that must submit to DOJ and DoD and DHS, you need to switch to the proper profile for each submission.
Last week I downloaded two different standards so I could understand the TOTs. I would have downloaded a third, but the agency restricts its distribution.
Word up
But I will tell you the biggest frustration I have with the standards.
In the EBTS and some other standards, there is a type of transaction referred to as “Criminal Ten-Print Submission (No Answer Necessary).” The abbreviation for this TOT is CNA.
Microsoft Word in default mode auto-corrects this from CNA to CAN.
CMOs, I can help you
But I’ve overcome this frustration over 30 years of immersing myself in all things biometric-translation related. This experience is benefiting a Bredemarket client that communicates with end customers regarding many of these standards.
Can my experience benefit you as your organization produces content, proposal, and analysis materials on a deadline? If Bredemarket can help you catch up or get ahead, let’s talk.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Organization…For Now, Anyway
Both identity/biometric industry professionals and the general public have an intense interest in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This isn’t a new interest, but has persisted since the Department was created.
But it’s important to remember that DHS has a bunch of different components, ranging from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to the U.S. Coast Guard.
And you don’t want to get them confused. You really don’t.
If you go the the DHS website and visit the Organizational Chart page, you can download a PDF of the organizational chart. As of November 8, 2023. (We’ll return to that.) As a help, here’s an image showing the organizational chart.
The chart is mostly filled with a myriad of offices that don’t interest most people. I don’t think political activists really care about the Office of Public Affairs.
The sexy stuff can be found in the 8 boxes at the bottom of the organizational chart. These include:
- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
- U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
- Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
- U.S. Secret Service.
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
- Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
- U.S. Coast Guard.
Remember remember remember that these are separate agencies, and each one has its own mission that is separate from the missions of the other agencies. So don’t try to complain to the Coast Guard about what ICE does or doesn’t do; the Coast Guard doesn’t care. In fact it’s highly likely that the people in the Coast Guard think that the people in ICE are a bunch of bozos. And vice versa. Even for the agencies that supposedly work together, such as ICE, CBP, USCIS, and TSA.
During my years with IDEMIA and its corporate predecessors, and during my time as a consultant at Bredemarket, I have dealt with many of these agencies and helped them achieve their missions.
But there’s one part of DHS that is of prime concern to me…and you can’t see it on the org chart, right above the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Information Officer.
What about OBIM?
As a biometric product marketing expert, I obviously have an intense interest in the Office of Biometric Identity Management, or OBIM. This office self-identifies as follows:
The Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) leads the U. S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the advancement of identity for a safer world and improved quality of life through the development and refinement of solutions to improve how identities are verified and managed. In this role, OBIM delivers biometric compare, store, share, and analyze services to DHS and mission partners. The need for biometrics continues to grow among DHS Components; interagency stakeholders (e.g., the Departments of State, Justice, and Defense); state, local, tribal and territorial entities; the Intelligence Community; and international mission partners. Biometric and identity services support critical national security priorities, including counterterrorism and immigration. OBIM is focused on delivering capabilities, services, and expertise that provide identity assurance for decision making. OBIM’s overall goals and priorities include continuing to design and deliver biometric and identity services, strengthening collaboration and coordination of with all DHS partners, and pursuing advancements in biometric technology and identity solutions to enable DHS operational missions.
So both because of its role within DHS and its role with other federal, state, local, and international government agencies, OBIM is key to biometric use. If you’ve heard of IDENT, OBIM is involved in that. If you’ve heard of HART, OBIM is involved in that.
The reason that OBIM is not on the displayed org chart is because it’s a component of another entity, the Management Directorate. It’s on the left side of the org chart,
And by the way, OBIM may go away
As I mentioned earlier in this post, the displayed org chart is dated November 8, 2023. Since that day we have transitioned to a new President who is keenly interested in the work of DHS, and who may alter the displayed organizational chart.
One potential change is already public knowledge. Biometric Update:
“As the U.S. federal government expands its use of biometric technologies to manage everything from border security to federal benefits, an internal debate over the future of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) has emerged as a flashpoint. Conversations inside the Trump administration, believed to be led by influential White House adviser Stephen Miller, have fueled concerns about the potential consolidation of OBIM under the direct control of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).”
As you can imagine, the consequences could be dramatic.
“‘There is a good chance that OBIM will be forced into CBP, which will mean that the 40-plus stakeholders that OBIM currently has could well be treated secondarily to the CBP-centric border mission,’ one source told Biometric Update on condition of anonymity, adding, ‘That would not be a great outcome.'”
You have to wonder whether the anonymous source was from an international agency, worried that CBP wouldn’t care about its homeland security needs.
Or maybe a tribal agency with the same concern.
Or maybe the FBI, who could fear that CBP wouldn’t care about law enforcement.
Or maybe ICE, who could worry that CBP would prioritize tarrifs and border protection over immigration enforcement. Because border protection and immigration enforcement are two separate tasks, which is why there are two separate agencies in the first place.
In summary, don’t just talk about a monolithic DHS. Know the players. And which players may strike out in the future.
The Nomad Returns
My nomadic journey has ended.
The relative’s outpatient surgery was a success, and recovery is progressing.
Meanwhile, I met with one client and advanced several client product marketing projects, including a requirements document (done those for years), some product talking points (done those for years), a price/cost/supplier exercise (done those for years), and a project status report (done those for years).
I also published four Bredemarket posts (including this one) and the usual assortment of social media content on various channels (with the exception of one).
U.S. persons should pay special attention to my coverage of IDGA’s DoD/DHS border security report (blog, Substack, elsewhere).
I think I need a vacation.
Tracking 2025 Changes to U.S. Border Security Policy
Among the available downloads for the Institute for Defense and Government Advancement’s (IDGA’s) upcoming Border Technology Summit is one entitled “Tracking 2025 Changes to U.S. Border Security Policy.”
“In conjunction with a new administration in the White House, operations on U.S. borders have shifted drastically in 2025. Figures from Customs & Border Patrol (CBP) show apprehensions at U.S. borders are higher than they were at this time a year ago, and a recent travel ban has restricted entrance into the U.S. for citizens from 12 countries.
“In its first six months, the Trump administration has moved quickly to mitigate what the White House is calling an “invasion” taking place on the southern border. On Inauguration Day, January 20th, the new administration moved quickly to sign a handful of new policies directed towards American borders. This report will highlight how executive orders, CBP mission areas, and DoD actions on the southern border have established a new normal for American border security. The first section will look at the instructions explicitly laid out in the executive orders signed by President Trump.
“If you are interested in learning more about the future of border security, register for IDGA’s Border Technology Summit taking place September 23-24 in San Diego, California. The two-day summit provides a forum to explore the latest advancements in border security technology. This year, we are focusing on engaging our audience with high-level discussions surrounding advancements in biometrics, non-intrusive inspection, smart walls, current and future operations of border security, and much more.”
This download and others are available via this page: https://www.idga.org/events-border-tech-summit/downloads
California Voter Proof of Identity AND Citizenship: How?
(Imagen 4)
This post provides an update on election integrity, which I haven’t discussed since March.
The update? Assemblymember Carl DeMaio wants to put a proposition on the 2026 California ballot that achieves three purposes:
- “[R]equire the state to verify proof of citizenship when a person registers to vote.”
- Require voters to “provide identifications at the polls.”
- “Those who vote through mail-in ballots would have to give the last four digits of a government-issued ID such as a Social Security number.”
Let’s go through these…backwards.
Mail-in ballots
The third proposal about authenticating mail-in ballots is silly.
The mere fact that someone knows the last four digits of a Social Security Number does NOT prove that the person is the valid holder of the Social Security Number in question.
Frankly, I’m surprised that DHS released Leonardo Garcia Venegas just because he knew a Social Security Number. Of course, I’m also surprised that they determined his REAL ID was fake.
In-person ballots
Which brings us to the second proposal about requiring a government ID for in-person voting.
I’ve already addressed why this is silly. The short version? Election precinct workers have neither the equipment nor the training to tell whether a government ID is real or fake.
Voter registration…and re-registration
That only leaves the first one, proving citizenship at voter registration. This one is technically feasible; the feds do it all the time. The California Secretary of State could merely adapt the federal I-9 process to the state level; I’m sure Janice Kephart and her company ZipID would love to help the state with that.
Especially since the requirement for election integrity dictates that all of California’s existing voters would need to re-register to prove their citizenship.
All 22+ million of them.
Because if you DO NOT require all California voters to re-register, the whole exercise is pointless.
Bredemarket 