Borders Of The Future: How Technology Will Change

Immigration And Security Systems

By Mark Rowe
Civil Service World
March 20, 2018
Read more at https://www.civilserviceworld.com/in-depth/article/borders-of-the-future-how-
technology-will-change-immigration-and-security-systems

What do new technologies mean for border security in the UK? A recent CSW round table brought
together academics and senior officials to explore the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead. Mark
Rowe reports.

Bottom row (l-r): Marcia Wilson, interviewing officer for the Department for Work and Pension; Richard
Freeman, senior police and security adviser, Department for International Trade; Professor James
Ferryman, University of Reading; Gareth Prosser, senior officer, Border Strategy, National Crime Agency
Imagine a world in which we travel seamlessly from one country to another, physical borders all but made
invisible by an all-powerful chip in our mobile phones. Inside that chip – or less fashionably, in our
passports – will be our identity, a virtual ‘us’: the chip will comprise verified biometric data ranging from
fingerprint and iris to voice recognition and even our gait, the way we walk, or the shape of our wrist or
finger bones.

This is the world depicted by biometrics experts and it, or at least the technology that will enable it, is
either here already or imminent. Following in its slipstream are huge opportunities – and challenges – for
border security.

Such eye-catching innovations, and how government can implement them effectively, were the subject
of a recent round table held by Civil Service World in conjunction with Leidos, a science and technology
solutions and services provider working in the defence, intelligence, national security, civil, and health
markets. The round table brought together leading academics with public sector practitioners to explore
the latest developments in biometrics and border security technology research.

As the UK faces complex threats from organised crime and extremist groups, the government is under
pressure to improve border and public security at the same time as driving efficiencies. The issue is
particularly pressing as UK agencies plan to reform and re-design their systems to support post-Brexit
immigration and security arrangements.

Quickly, it became apparent that different civil servants brought disparate perspectives and concerns.
“Insider threats are of particular interest along with the use of drones,” said Gareth Prosser, senior officer,
border strategy for the National Crime Agency. For Marcia Wilson, interviewing officer for the Department
for Work and Pensions, the concern was how Brexit would affect jobs at her department and its ability to
embrace biometric technology, while Simon Chapman, police adviser, the Centre for Applied Science and
Technology at the Home Office, expressed the importance of using biometrics when “engaging with
intelligence agencies across Europe”. Matt Palmer, risk resilience manager at HM Prison and Probation
Service looked at the issue from the other side: what opportunities did biometric technology offer
criminals? “From a prison point of view, whatever is implemented nationally or globally will have an
impact on us,” he said. “This may assist us, but on the other side are the offenders we get – what dangers
and damage can they do with this?”

The discussion began with a presentation by Professor James Ferryman, of the University of Reading, who
outlined the extraordinary potential for biometrics to truly transform the way in which we cross borders.
Ferryman leads PROTECT, an EU-funded project developing a biometrics-based personal ID system for
border surveillance. It was feasible, he said, for biometrics to develop free-flow and faster border control
by reducing the need for physical borders and enhancing security at the same time. “Travellers need to
be fully aware of when and how borders are going to be different,” he said.

Ferryman described a world where borders become “biometric capture areas and corridors” through
which air and sea travellers would move seamlessly. Having completed any applications online in advance,
the biometrics in their phone, or passport, would be recognised in this “corridor”.

“The number of passengers through our airports is projected to double over the next 20-30 years – the
rise in data flows will be stupendous”
Gareth Prosser, National Crime Agency

Land borders, said Ferrymen, would need to establish an effective means of scanning people within a
vehicle. This process “would not be quite non-stop,” he said, “but border guards could scan a device inside
the car to verify passengers identity.”

The discussion shifted quickly from the potential capabilities and benefits of biometrics and instead shone
an intense spotlight on the practicalities of implementing such a system. These included the training of
border guards and, as Prosser put it, “the enormous weight that was being placed on the chip in the
passports or phones and on those who inputted the data into these systems”.

Public trust in extensive biometrics and data collection – which is particularly important to civil servants
on the front line who will be the ones who must implement any such measures – came under heavy
scrutiny. Some participants argued that a yawning gap separates technology and a lack of public trust in
governments to implement said technology. But John Mears, vice-president and tech fellow for Leidos,
challenged these assumptions. He presented findings from the IATA 2017 Global Passenger Survey, which
showed that most travellers preferred self-boarding technologies like e-gates at airports, and also chose
biometric identification as their preferred travelling token. “However, educating the public about
biometrics is still important in most border crossing applications,” he said. “Without effective educational
efforts, there is room for [public] misunderstanding and confusion about usage which can slow the
process.”

He added that there needed to be a clearer discussion around the fact that privacy and anonymity are not
synonymous. One can remain anonymous but have one’s privacy invaded, he suggested, and likewise one
can be identified without losing privacy. The way for governments to counter misunderstanding is to be
transparent and to educate, he said: “People should also understand that there is a sovereign need to be
identified when they cross our borders.”

When it comes to trust, the panel agreed there was a clear paradox. As Ariela Ferber, senior policy adviser,
identity, security policy team at the Home Office, said: “People seem to trust Apple to hold their data but
distrust the government – actually we police it very well.” The group agreed that there was insufficient
data on public opinion and attitudes towards perceived biometric intrusion and potential benefits; and
that research was needed on this.

Another issue is that some biometric technologies have been shown to be vulnerable to individual
spoofing. Government and industry must constantly identify these weaknesses and develop effective
countermeasures. Difficulties can also emerge from benign sources, said Mears. “For instance, if people
are allowed to submit their own enrolment photos, they sometimes Photoshop their faces because they
are vain. They remove the blemishes and wrinkles and bags, but these ‘features’ are what makes you
identifiable and distinct from other people who might look like you.” He added that there is academic
research to detect even benign sources of deception.

Ageing is another issue to unpick: would people as they grow older have to re-enrol to ensure their faces
were recognised? Mears said that many face recognition systems can reliably re-recognise people as they
age, but children have remained a challenge. He said: “Those identifying blemishes and wrinkles we
acquire as we age are not yet present in the smooth skin of children.” Fingerprints have been shown to
be effective identifiers even for very young children, he said, and DNA can also be used with certainty
with children. While processing times for DNA are not yet rapid enough for most routine border crossings,
Mears said, it is gaining support for use in cases where human trafficking or immigration fraud is suspected
since DNA is the only biometric which can determine family relationships.

Other practical issues arose: being able to glide through passport control was of little use if you still had
to wait for half an hour at the airport luggage carousel. Geoff Whitaker, technical specialist, forensics and
identity at the Home Office Centre for Applied Science and Technology, noted: “We can develop a British
solution but it may be of limited value if other countries don’t facilitate it.”

Inevitably, capacity and cost cast large shadows over technology, and biometrics looks likely to be no
different. “The number of passengers through our airports is projected to double over the next 20-30
years,” said Prosser. “The rise in data flows will be stupendous and [if biometric data is collected] then we
are looking at something quite significant, a quadrupling of data.” Reflecting on the cost of implementing
new technologies, Gill suggested that it may be possible to introduce them to certain groups first, badging
them as a premium service for business travellers, for example. This would help to both stagger and
recoup the cost of implementation.

Many of the potential applications for biometrics that were outlined at the roundtable go beyond current
laws on the use of data, but introducing new legislation is challenging with an already-packed
parliamentary timetable. Ferber said every effort had to be made to implement technology within existing
laws rather than requiring new ones. “It will be challenging. The more that can be done without further
legislation the better,” she said.

There’s no denying that the roundtable identified a significant number of bear traps in relation to
biometrics and border security. Yet Gill said this should not be a barrier to deploying it judiciously. “I’m at
the optimistic end of things,” she said. “How do we make our systems work better, how do we land it with
our contractors and suppliers? We can’t do this by ourselves, we need to identify the challenges, and work
out how we meet and mitigate them.”