Biometrics at the Statue of Liberty 452
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.
do you have to use a finger? (Score:5, Interesting)
a knuckle for example?
Which locker did I use? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't have a problem with this (Score:3, Interesting)
honest question (Score:3, Interesting)
Plastics... (Score:2, Interesting)
Curious about the technology architecture (Score:3, Interesting)
One really nice use would be to have chemical detectors and similar rigged up with the lockers to prevent someone from storing a bomb inside them -- and hey, if you find a prohibited item that needs to be turned over to law enforcement, you already have a fingerprint to run against the National Crime Information Computer (NCIC, the same one used for background checks for security clearances and the like).
Seeing as how similar biometric systems are already in place for people with visas entering the country, why not tie it all together into a system that Homeland Defense can monitor? Ooh, I get all tingly thinking about the implications here.
So... anyone have any additional information on the company that did the manufacturing for this system, or any ideas on what the internal architecture is like? Inquiring privacy-minded people want to know. ^^
Re:This is neither "rights" nor "online". (Score:3, Interesting)
Convienently for terrorists (Score:5, Interesting)
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/25/13
Re:Which locker did I use? (Score:3, Interesting)
They have passcode style ones at the mall here, but it isn't hard to tell which locker is yours.. As soon as you enter your code you can here the door unlock.
My fingerprint reader story (Score:5, Interesting)
I was still let in.
So I went in, put the monitor down, and came back out to experiment. I tried another finger. It worked... I tried a knuckle. It worked...
Finally, I held my hair (long hair) back, leaned down, and gently pressed the tip of my NOSE to the scanner plate.
It worked.
Moral of the story: Biometric security is sometimes just so much heehaw, and it does malfunction (and yields false-positives as well as false-negatives).
Fingerprint being used at Paramount Parks (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:honest question (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Differing Slashdot summaries (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:do you have to use a finger? (Score:3, Interesting)
-
would any sufficiently swirly object work?
Better yet use someone else's finger! 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. He then boiled them to get the skin off, glued it to his fingers and used that to work on a bomb he was making. In that case his purpose was to try to make it look like the other guy did it and start a war between Israel and Palestine but I see no reason it wouldn't also work in general. Kill some innocent bystander, get their finger skin off and attach it to yours then put your bomb in a locker. If it's found or the database survives the blast the trace goes back to that person. Then the FBI wastes months trying to find the body the real terrorist disposed of while the real terrorist escapes the country.Not to mention that a while back it was shown that you could defeat many biometric fingerprint scanners like this with silly putty, has that been fixed?
So anyone feel any safer with them using fingerprint scanners for those lockers? Even if they do run them against the FBI database automatically (not really confirmed or disproven so who knows) it isn't going to help against a dedicated terrorist. It's a lot like computer and network security. You can do a lot to make it harder for someone to break in and that'll deter all the casual attackers and the script kiddies. But if someone really wants in your system they'll get in unless you manage to trace their identity and get them arrested first. Unless the fingerprint scanner is referenced against the FBI database, the matches are made in milliseconds, heavily armed LE is dispacted in minutes AND the terrorist uses their real fingerprints (or actually uses a locker) then this is all for naught.
Re:MOD Parent Overdramatic (Score:4, Interesting)
Overdramtic? I am not so sure about that.
But I have to agree with the poster who speaks about using boxes to change things.
Re:Convienently for terrorists (Score:2, Interesting)
No doubt this will be declared a subversive act.
Re:Have you been awake for the last three years? (Score:3, Interesting)
4 planes were hijacked, only 3 buildings were hit. The last plane failed not they forgot to bring box cutters, but because the passengers realized what was really going on and took action. The presence of the horribly dangerous box-cutters did NOT help the terrorists in any way shape or form. They could have taken the first 3 planes just by claiming they had a bomb and that they would blow up the plane unless the pilots left the cockpit and let them fly it.
They succeeded in the first 3 only because we were complacent and they had surprise on there side, not because they took tiny sharp instruments to threaten us with.
The second they lost element of surprise than the heroes of that flight LAUGHED at their puny box cutters, fought them, and WON.
If they try it again, this time with 4 ft long, razor sharp titanium alloy long swords on a plane, they would STILL be unable to crash that plane into a building because they lost the surprise.
The current anti-blade regulations are ridiculous, do not in any way increase security. I personally have seen people sneak pocket knives past them. In fact, if the airlines were to issue everyone on board a 1 ft short sword, I think it would do more towards preventing terrorist attacks than attempting to block "box cutters". If it wern't for drunk people and children, this probably would already be a rule.
Re:I was just there... (Score:3, Interesting)
I tell you, if you watch the new Manchurian Candidate, you see some of what really bothers me. The back-story, if you will, is full of national events that are on the verge of actually occurring. Armed army units patrolling streets, every monument in DC guarded, etc. These things really really bother me and make me wonder where the America I know has gone.
The president controls federal troops in the US as well as abroad. The Posse Commitatus act is a good law. I wish it was still upheld. A war on an ethereal enemy gives the president an opportunity to corrupt the constitution and gain unreasonable powers. When are americans going to get their heads out of their butts, stop being afraid of their own shadows, and hold elected officials responsible to the Constitution?
Re:I was just there... (Score:3, Interesting)
One nut rammed his truck into the front steps at parliament hill a few years back.
A crazed soldier walked into the Quebec legislature 20 years back, and shot the place up - it was just chance that he screwed up the time the legislature was in session, and arrived when the chamber was empty.
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-70-1308-7634-11/th
I guess you could also count the time back in 1916 when the mob burned the centre block to a gutted shell. Despite that, I am glad they don't turn the place into a fortress.
Re:Fine, but acknowledge Clinton sucked ass, too (Score:2, Interesting)