Biometrics at the Statue of Liberty

gurps_npc writes "There is an interesting CNN article about the Statue of Liberty finally opening again (it was closed since 9/11 for security reasons). They have increased security to 'airport levels', and offer lockers for people to rent, partly to keep those incredibly dangerous objects like swiss army knives away from the fragile Statue of Liberty. But instead of keys, the lockers use fingerprint readers to open and close (approximately one reader for every 50 lockers)." The article notes that the design was dictated by the Transportation Security Administration.

The prints are NOT run against the FBI database

[gorbachev]

Read the damn article before posting it.

The article discusses other end-user fingerprinting applications, and mentions the US-VISIT program where every terrorist, uh, foreigner entering the United States will get fingerprinted and the fingerprints of THAT scan will be run against the FBI database.

The fingerprints taken to access lockers at the Statue of Liberty are NOT run against the FBI database.

Last time I used one...

[Anonymous Coward]

I used one of these things at Universal Studios a few months back, and it wasn't a pleasant experience. When we came back to get stuff out of it, it wasn't reading the finger properly. We had to spend 30 minutes trying to find someone that had authority over the lockers. He had to clean off the reader because he said that over time they accumulate the oil of all the people that use them, and it hinders the scanning process.

Differing Slashdot summaries

[RobertB-DC]

Somewhat off-topic, but at the moment, the Slashdot front page offers a slightly different version of this story summary (even after hitting Refresh). In fact, the story even disappeared from the front page for a moment, and I thought it was destined to be a ghost article [slashdot.org].

Here's the info, for posterity, with differences in bold.

Your Rights Online: Statue of Liberty Checks Fingerprints Against FBI Watchlist

Posted by michael on Thu Aug 12, '04 11:13 AM
from the oh-the-irony dept.
gurps_npc writes "There is an interesting CNN article about the Statue of Liberty finally opening again (it was closed since 9/11 for security reasons). They have increased security to 'airport levels', and offer lockers for people to rent, partly to keep those incredibly dangerous objects like swiss army knives away from the fragile Statue of Liberty. But instead of keys, the lockers use fingerprint readers to open and close (approximately one reader for every 50 lockers). The privacy violation is of course that the lockers ALSO check your fingerprints against the FBI Terrorist Watch List. The article does not mention if any record of the finger print is kept by the FBI if it does not match. It also does not mention if the machine themselves keep a record of your fingerprint after you recover your stuff."

Note that the editorial comment about the TSA design requirement wasn't in the original, either.

Similar to Universal Studios in Florida?

[Hitiek]

During a recent vacation to Universal Studios in Florida I had a chance to use what I assume are the same type of lockers. It worked reasonably well for me, but the person I was with had a lot of trouble getting it to read her fingerprint. There was also one reader that was in direct sunlight during part of the day, and would not read anyones fingerprint during that time.

There is one computer with a fingerprint reader and a touch screen for a bank of lockers. When renting the locker you had to put your finger on the reader twice. Once the computer had two reads that matched for you, it would give you a locker number, you put your stuff in it and push the button to lock it. When you come back you have to remember your locker number and enter that on a touch screen, then present your finger to the reader again. When your fingerprint matches, the system unlocks your locker and you get your stuff.

I was just there...

[chrispyman]

Earlier this week infact I visited the statue. Let me just say that security was incredibly tight, even moreso than at airports. To take the boat over to the island you first had to go through the standard metal detector/xray as you would at any airport. Next, if you wanted to get into the statue (and had a ticket to do so), you had to put all backpacks and large purses into one of these neat lockers. And after that, you went through a rather interesting machine that "sniffs" you for explosive materials and then go through another metal detector/xray. And even after all that security, you can only walk through the statue (actually the pedestal) while being watched and guided by a park ranger as well as several national park security gaurds. All and all it felt a bit like overkill, but considering that the statue is probably one of the most important symbols of America, it makes sense to so heavily gaurd it.

Re:I don't have a problem with this

[EvanED]

AFAIK, it still takes a bit of specialized skill and a few minutes at least to enter fingerprints into AFIS. The operator has to go through and mark splits and ends in the ridges, centers of swirls, etc. That much isn't automated. While/if this is true, they won't really be able to check every print.

Re:Plastics...

[ilsa]

More importantly, fingerprint biometrics have a failure rate of about 2%. [ibia.org] That means that if they have 1000 locker uses in a day, they should expect 20 failures. There were 3,240,307 visits in 2003. [nps.gov] Lets say for the sake of argument that 10% use the lockers, or 324,000 people. That means roughly 6480 failures.

I wonder what the proceedure is for getting your stuff back should you be one of those 2%.

Is this really so surprising?

[Zathras26]

This kind of privacy intrusion has been going on for a lot longer than most of us think or realize. In my home state of Hawaii, for instance, you are required to be fingerprinted just to get a state ID card, and I'd hazard a guess that that's not the only state that does that, either. You could dodge this particular fingerprint problem by not visiting the Statue of Liberty, but the ID card requirement in Hawaii would be a lot harder to get around.

Universal Studios Uses this

[razmaspaz]

I was at Universal "Islands of Adventure" in Orlando and they used this same system. Worked really well. All you need to do is remember which locker station you used and it recalls the actual number for you and opens it when you scan your finger.

Re:Freedom?

[KarMann]

Yeah, but in that context, he was talking about a web domain (I think either whitehouse.com or gwbush.com, or something like that) that mocked him, and his campaign was trying to have the domain reassigned to him by the courts. That's not exactly the kind of pressing concern that should require amending our First Amendment rights (you listening, Jerry Falwell [slashdot.org]?).

Re:MOD Parent Overdramatic

[Armchair Dissident]

Hitler was actually voted in.

Hitler was not elected; he was appointed to the seat of Chancellor in 1933 by Hindenburg to whom Hitler had lost the presidential election to in 1932. He managed to convince Hindenburg to merge the seats of the Chancellor and President into one upon the death of Hindenburg.

Hitler became effective fuhrer after the Reichstag fire in 1933 when he claimed emergency powers that effectively quashed whilst not exactly outlawing political dissent. Strangely enough the merger of Chancellor and President was then approved by referrendum in 1934.

You are free to draw your own parallels if you wish.

Re:Fine, but acknowledge Clinton sucked ass, too

[Pentultimate Aeon]

These quotes are taken slightly out of context:

"We can't be too concerned with protecting the rights of ordinary Americans." - Bill Clinton.

Actually, the quote is:

President William J. Clinton: "We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles...that we are unable to think about reality." USA Today, March 11, 1993

Still an unattractive quote to a lot of folks, but when you stick a period in the middle of that sentence, its meaning changes a bit, no?

Also:
"We're going to take some things away from you, for the common good." - Hillary Clinton, very recently.

Yes, she said it. But what was she talking about, and who was she talking to? Was she talking about freedom? Rights? Liberties? Noooo... tax dollars.

Here it is in a slightly broader context:

From:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/article/index.cfm/i/0629 04n_clintons

Headlining an appearance with other Democratic women senators on behalf of Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is up for re-election this year, Hillary Clinton told several hundred supporters -- some of whom had ponied up as much as $10,000 to attend -- to expect to lose some of the tax cuts passed by President Bush if Democrats win the White House and control of Congress.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

There is a big difference between taking away tax cuts from the wealthy, and taking away all American's civil liberties.

Be wary of context when you see a quote, folks.

Re:do you have to use a finger?

[imnoteddy]

Seriously enough I saw an episode of that one show from last year (can't remember the name but it's a crime drama about national security) where this one terrorist killed a guy in another country, then came to the US with the guy's fingers in baggies strapped around his waist.

The terrorist should have done a google search [google.com] to find much simpler ways to fake fingerprints.

Re:MOD Parent Overdramatic

[metamatic]

Of course, while Hitler may not have been voted in in a Presidential-style election, nevertheless Hitler's NSDAP got the majority (43.9%) in the election of 1933, as well as 35% of the vote in the Presidential election of 1932 (coming second).

The point the poster was trying to make was that things get worse gradually, and the history of Nazi Germany and Hitler's gradual rise to absolute power clearly bears that out.