Faces Are Being Scanned At US Airports With No Safeguards on Data Use (nytimes.com) 106
schwit1 writes:
The program makes boarding an international flight a breeze: Passengers step up to the gate, get their photo taken and proceed onto the plane. There is no paper ticket or airline app. Thanks to facial recognition technology, their face becomes their boarding pass.... The problem confronting thousands of travelers, is that few companies participating in the program, called the Traveler Verification Service, give explicit guarantees that passengers' facial recognition data will be protected.
And even though the program is run by the Department of Homeland Security, federal officials say they have placed no limits on how participating companies -- mostly airlines but also cruise lines -- can use that data or store it, opening up travelers' most personal information to potential misuse and abuse such as being sold or used to track passengers' whereabouts.
The Department of Homeland Security is now using the data to track foreigners overstaying their visas, according to the Times. "After passengers' faces are scanned at the gate, the scan is sent to Customs and Border Protection and linked with other personally identifying data, such as date of birth and passport and flight information."
But the face scans are collected by independent companies, and Border Protection officials insist they have no control over how that data gets used.
And even though the program is run by the Department of Homeland Security, federal officials say they have placed no limits on how participating companies -- mostly airlines but also cruise lines -- can use that data or store it, opening up travelers' most personal information to potential misuse and abuse such as being sold or used to track passengers' whereabouts.
The Department of Homeland Security is now using the data to track foreigners overstaying their visas, according to the Times. "After passengers' faces are scanned at the gate, the scan is sent to Customs and Border Protection and linked with other personally identifying data, such as date of birth and passport and flight information."
But the face scans are collected by independent companies, and Border Protection officials insist they have no control over how that data gets used.
Wait for the US wide database sharing (Score:2, Insightful)
Illegal migrants who thought their "new" passport would never get cross referenced with any other US database.
People who asked for "protection" in the USA going back for a holiday in the nation they "escaped" from for a few months.
Criminals who created an entire fake life with a entire new passport ID story suddenly get detected from that old city/state police image
Database sharing and reconciliation between
Re: (Score:1)
So....as long as I'm not a criminal then I'm fine? Great "examples".
Re: (Score:1)
I believe every story ever written of computers enforcing utopian ideals on humanity ends with all of humanity wiped out through perfect enforcement of their laws.
I'd be surprised if even someone in a coma is not arguably violating some law at every moment given how ridiculous our laws have become.
So, yes, as long as you're not a criminal, you're fine. Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just getting in your car to go somewhere after taking an allergy medicine can get you arrested for DUI if the cop is an a$$hole...
How is the cop going to know to target you, unless your driving IS actually impaired?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
A criminal, an illegal migrant, a person with fake ID, a person who claimed protection going back to the nation they escaped will be detected.
Re: (Score:2)
Citizens with their own passports who pay their tax on time can enjoy international travel AC. A criminal, an illegal migrant, a person with fake ID, a person who claimed protection going back to the nation they escaped will be detected.
Plus a bunch of completely innocent people who have been unnecessarily detained and harassed after being misidentified. I believe Bayes theorem will have something to say about this.
https://www.wired.co.uk/articl... [wired.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Get a passport.
Apply to the nation and wait for an approved visa.
Wait for that other nation to consider the visa request.
With the correct reason for travel eg work, study, a holiday, an extended visit.
Wait for approval from that nation and get the passport ready.
Enjoy the visit. When things go wrong, try the embassy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You are completely underestimating how much administrative (or technical if considering these kinds of databases) mistakes can screw you over.
If your country has a history of fucking over tourists (regardless of whether a tourist visa isn't a "right") then I simply won't visit. I believe many others will share my views, and this is (for example) why many refuse to visit Saudi Arabi or the UAE based on their treatment of women and human rights violations.
You can always judge a culture by how it treats the mo
Re: (Score:2)
The USA will finally be able to reconcile its visa use. Every legally allowed person into the USA. Every person returning to their own nation within the time of their visa
The administrative side is a positive.
The USA now has a way of knowing on the day when a person is over staying.
The "vulnerable" will get the full support of their own nations embassy... just as they had over many decades o
Re: (Score:1)
Now if we could just use the same technology to reduce the backlog of legal visa and citizenship applications to something more reasonable than a three decade wait, we could have a real conversation about immigration.
Re: (Score:1)
Who cares, we have better technology than they do. There is NO reason, with the NSA's total information database, that we shouldn't be able to do a background check on any one of 7.5 billion human beings in less than a week.
Re: (Score:2)
Then go and get a new passport? Thats for the person with the passport to try and remember AC.
Re: (Score:1)
Either that, or the new big fashion statement among criminals is going to become glitter makeup.
Re: (Score:1)
First they came for the blacks, but I said nothing, because I was not black.
Then they came for the Muslims, but I said nothing because I was not a Muslim.
Then they came for the illegal aliens, but I said nothing because I was not an illegal alien.
Then nobody came for me, because we didn’t need militarized police or a surveillance state anymore.
Re: Wait for the US wide database sharing (Score:1)
They lied. It's illegal to lie on your asylum application
Re: (Score:2)
They lied.
Not necessarily. It's entirely possible for régimes to change. So it's reasonable for Tadeusz who got political asylum in 1985 to be perfectly OK with going to visit his cousin in Poznan today.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So you think it's OK to strip someone of their lawful permanent resident status or even citizenship just because they came from a different country.
Thanks for confirming your xenophobia and disregard for the law. Not to mention your xenophobia and callousness. Oh, and your xenophobia, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Thats why nations are so interested in people who claim legally they need full protection but then go on long holidays in the nation they claim to need protection from.
That new citizenship might not last very long when person is found to have not told their new nation the truth when getting "lawful" new "citizenship".
New facial recognition is going to make such holiday result in legal questions on return
Re: (Score:2)
You and AHuxley both appear to be confused about what "permanent resident" and "citizenship" mean.
Meanwhile, I'm not the least bit confused about your obvious lack of empathy for and desire to kick out those damned foreigners. Strawman much?
Just how much immigrant ancestry do you yourselves have, anyway? I'll tell you: It's 100%. Just like everyone else on the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
To go back for a holiday would show that legal standing of needing that kind of protection in another nation was over. They then can return to their own nation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
A year later they take a few months holiday in the same nation they claimed to need full protection from...
Thats why facial recognition will allow governments to uncover people who do not need that kind of protection.
Documents requesting full protection will match the face of a person going back to the same nation.
Re: (Score:2)
But not a single one is an excuses for not having safeguards in place for who can use the biometrics and what for.
It might be typical for US citizen to not know about privacy as a legal concept but one day you will regret these very invasive policies.
Re: (Score:2)
People whose image had the wrong associated metadata applied to it.
People who expose a flaw in the image matching system the vendor won't acknowledge.
People who look very similar to someone else.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? It's not illegal to collect data of people walking around in public spaces.
Try taking pictures/video of police stations or Federal buildings from public property, or try photographing police/government officials in public to collect their biometric/facial-ID data.
It would be a good idea to retain a lawyer and arrange your affairs for a long absence first, however.
Some animals are more equal than others.
Strat
More crap for your "convenience" (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure there are safeguards (Score:3)
Oh, you meant for the rest of us? Well, if you're gonna make a two tiered justice system you've got to break some omelets or something.
Re: (Score:2)
As bad as it sounds, putting special safeguards on data of the very wealthy is good.
The rest of us are already protected by the fact we don't stand out. I've never been followed by paparazzi, I don't have stuff that attract professional thieves or any family member worth kidnapping for ransom, I don't have an army of suckers asking me for favors anywhere I go. So who will go out of their way to get my data? I could put my personal phone number online for everyone to see and nothing will happen since it does
Re: (Score:2)
Is your face private? (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3)
No, they'll just use it to cross-reference your other data AND know that you're out of the country.
(Congratulations, you apparently don't know anything about databases AND you didn't even bother to read all of the summary before posting silly questions.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tax problems? No issued passport but the same person now has a "new" passport to go on holiday with?
Illegal migrants wanting to go on holiday expecting their created US documents to work due to federal/state "privacy" laws.
People who are now in the USA who told the US government they could never return to their own nation. Now going on a holiday to the nation they wanted to be protected from
Re: (Score:2)
If I'm so ignorant, feel free to enlighten me.
But, no, you're not doing that, are you?
And my fragile ego is just fine, thanks.
Re: (Score:3)
Depends on who "they" are, and whether they have a legitimate reason to access such data.
The issue is not with the taking of images, using facial recognition tech, or knowing that you're in or out of the country. The issue is whom this information gets shared with, how it can be used by them, and what safeguards it's under.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Comparing "driver's license" photos to the new airport face scans are not equivalent at all.
You can't do too much with a single, low res, front-on, photograph, as per your driver's license.
The airport face scans are high resolution, well lit, taken from multiple angles, use IR face profiling (like what the iPhone does), and has a very high* probability that the person being photographed is the person on the documentation.
*Your scare mongering above not withstanding, people using other people's passports for
I'm surprised if anyone is surprised by this... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
1984 (Score:2)
1984
Re: (Score:1)
Obama already did that one. Now Trump is busy stealing it from Obama. It's been a tradition for at least the last 50 years for each President to steal the reputation of "Worst President Ever" from the previous one, and I don't see Trump as the bottom of the barrel yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Obama already did that one. Now Trump is busy stealing it from Obama. It's been a tradition for at least the last 50 years for each President to steal the reputation of "Worst President Ever" from the previous one, and I don't see Trump as the bottom of the barrel yet.
Who have you got that's worse than Trump? Even Kim Cardassian would be better than Trump.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know, but I'm confident *somebody* will turn up in either 2020 or 2024. Trump only gets to act the way he does because he's taking Obama to the next level. Maybe somebody who will nuke Mexico, maybe somebody who will nuke the New York Stock Exchange, but either way, it can always get worse.
Re: (Score:1)
I fail to see how better, more objective, enforcement of the law is a bad thing.
Re: (Score:2)
That happened under Obama. Dumbass.