There's some level of difference to be fair Hacking is a concern in both but the bigger issue is potential for abuse of power. In the case of border checks th

There's some level of difference to be fair Hacking is a concern in both but the bigger issue is potential for abuse of power. In the case of border checks the target is by necessity someone that isn't a citizen. This means that: 1. We generally afford them less safeguards than citizens so it creates less precedent (both legal and in terms of overton window) 2. The potential for abuse is ultimately less because a traveler on a short term visa is unlikely to still be in the country / unable to leave if a hostile government comes to power and intends to abuse the data Also fingerprints and a picture are significantly less invasive than pervasive video surveillance in public spaces