Facial Recognition Technology for Certain Traveler and Noncitizen Identity Verification

Facial Recognition Technology for Certain Traveler and Noncitizen Identity Verification

INSIGHTi
Facial Recognition Technology for Certain
Traveler and Noncitizen Identity Verification
June 29, 2021
Facial recognition technology (FRT), which uses algorithms to compare faces against a collection of
known faces, is a biometric tool employed by law enforcement, including U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) officials. FRT can be used to verify the identity of travelers and certain noncitizens
awaiting entry.
FRT is used in two primary ways:
 identification searches, comparing features of a probe photo with those in a database of
images to produce a gal ery of potential matches ranked by similarity (not a single
affirmative match), and
 identity verifications, comparing a probe photo against known photos to produce a binary,
match/no match result.
Traveler Verification Service (TVS)
CBP employs FRT at many air, land, and sea ports of entry and preclearance locations, both domestical y
and abroad, and used it to process over 23 mil ion travelers in FY2020. Specifical y, CBP, in partnership
with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), uses FRT to verify travelers’ identities. TVS is a
public-private partnership between the federal government and private airlines, airports, and cruise lines.
It compares a traveler’s live photograph (taken, for example, by a gate agent) to a gal ery of preexisting
photographs maintained by CBP. The composition of the gal eries depends on the travel context. TVS
provides a match or no match result within two seconds. In case of the latter result, the traveler’s identity
is checked manual y by a CBP agent.
TVS Access through CBP One
In October 2020, CBP launched CBP One, a publicly available mobile application and portal for the
public to interact with CBP. Its functionality differs depending on the type of user. For instance, cargo
carriers can make appointments for the inspection of perishable items, travelers can apply for and view
their I-94 forms, and international organizations (IOs) can verify the enrollment of individuals in certain
programs—specifical y, the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11695
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service
2
Migrant Protection Protocols Program
MPP, or “Remain in Mexico,” was broadly implemented under the Trump Administration in mid-2019 to address what DHS
described as a "security and humanitarian crisis on the Southern border." MPP required many asylum seekers who arrived at
the southern border to wait in Mexico while U.S. immigration courts process their cases, a departure from the previous
policy of releasing some (particularly those in family groups) into the United States while they wait. The Biden
Administration, after suspending enrol ments in January 2021, ended the program and stopped new enrol ments in June
2021. Approximately 68,000 individuals were enrol ed in MPP and returned to Mexico. As of February 2021, there were
approximately 25,000 MPP enrol ees outside of the United States awaiting adjudication of their cases.
IOs, including the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization of Migration
(IOM), provide humanitarian and legal assistance to MPP enrol ees as they wait in Mexico. These organizations “identify MPP
enrol ees, verify their identity and MPP status, and transport them to a designated port of entry” at the date and time listed
on their Notice to Appear document. CBP has partnerships with specified IOs, identified by the Department of State, to
assist MPP enrol ees. These organizations have access to the international organization functionality on CBP One.
IOs can use CBP One to verify that an individual is enrolled in MPP and has a pending immigration case.
With the individual’s consent, IO users upload a photograph of the individual to CBP One, which
searches for a match against a pre-staged TVS photo gal ery comprised of approximately 70,000 images
of MPP enrollees saved in the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS’s) Enforcement Integrated
Database (EID). These images were collected during MPP enrollees’ initial encounters with CBP. Just as
TVS provides a match/no match response for travelers, it also does so for photographs that IOs enter in
CBP One to verify the identity of MPP enrollees.
 If a match is confirmed, CBP sends the biographic information associated with the EID
image (e.g., first name, last name, date of birth) to the Person Centric Query System
(PCQS) to verify the individual has a pending immigration case. The IO user then
receives one of four responses: (1) a green check mark indicating the individual is
enrolled in MPP and has a pending immigration case; (2) a yel ow bar indicating either
the individual is enrolled in MPP but their case is closed or the individual is enrolled in
MPP but CBP could not locate their immigration case (the IO user can then check the
Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review website to confirm the
case status); (3) a red “X” indicating CBP was unable to locate the individual’s
information; or (4) a system error message.
 If the submitted photograph results in a no match or if the individual elects not to provide
a photograph, the IO user can submit the individuals’ Alien Registration Number (“A-
Number”) instead. This wil also query EID and PCQS and result in one of the four
responses listed above. If CBP is stil unable to confirm a match, it can submit the
individual’s biographic information (e.g., first name, last name, date of birth) to CBP One
and repeat the same process.
Accuracy of TVS
One of the primary concerns over use of FRT has been its accuracy. While the reliability of FRT
algorithms has improved, accuracy rates can vary based on demographic factors. An errant match (false
positive) in TVS could pose a security risk, while an errant no match (false negative) could cause travel or
immigration delays. CBP internal analysis estimates the false positive rate of TVS at .0103%. (It did not
report the false negative rate.) Policymakers may exercise oversight over how CBP implements—
including training for officials using FRT—and evaluates the accuracy of TVS and related systems as
their use evolves.

Congressional Research Service
3
Author Information

Abigail F. Kolker
Kristin Finklea
Analyst in Immigration Policy
Specialist in Domestic Security

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN11695 · VERSION 1 · NEW