Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

A Researcher Attempted To Opt Out of Facial Recognition at the Airport -- It Wasn't Easy (wired.com) 210

Posted by msmash from the how-it-begins dept.
Allie Funk, writing for Wired: The announcement came as we began to board. Last month, I was at Detroit's Metro Airport for a connecting flight to Southeast Asia. I listened as a Delta Air Lines staff member informed passengers that the boarding process would use facial recognition instead of passport scanners. As a privacy-conscious person, I was uncomfortable boarding this way. I also knew I could opt out. Presumably, most of my fellow fliers did not: I didn't hear a single announcement alerting passengers how to avoid the face scanners.

To figure out how to do so, I had to leave the boarding line, speak with a Delta representative at their information desk, get back in line, then request a passport scan when it was my turn to board. Federal agencies and airlines claim that facial recognition is an opt-out system, but my recent experience suggests they are incentivizing travelers to have their faces scanned -- and disincentivizing them to sidestep the tech -- by not clearly communicating alternative options. Last year, a Delta customer service representative reported that only 2 percent of customers opt out of facial-recognition. It's easy to see why.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Researcher Attempted To Opt Out of Facial Recognition at the Airport -- It Wasn't Easy More

A Researcher Attempted To Opt Out of Facial Recognition at the Airport -- It Wasn't Easy

Comments Filter:

  • Next step: (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Quakeulf ( 2650167 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @12:33PM (#58868042)
    The chip implant. Most people are willingly going to do it and consider those who reject dumb, while they set themselves up as cattle in a slaughterhouse.

    • Re: Next step: (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @01:00PM (#58868204)

      This is absolutely hilarious, you can easily see this dystopia coming, people deny the slippery slope while they beg for the collar.

      Its inevitable. Society wants to be slaves. They don't understand and cannot appreciate the rarefied air of freedom.

      DO NOT ASK HOW YOU GOT THERE. you did this to yourselves.

      • This post is the equivalent of a crazy person with a sandwich board standing on the corner screaming "the end is nigh!"

        • And in neither case are they necessarily wrong. (Okay, one is much more plausible than the other -- but still.)

        • This post is the equivalent of a crazy person with a sandwich board standing on the corner screaming "the end is nigh!"

          That is what sandwich boards already say half the time.

          Are you sure you've ever even visited the US, Ivan?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Joviex ( 976416 )

        DO NOT ASK HOW YOU GOT THERE. you did this to yourselves.

        And you are living here too. You are just as responsible for lettting it happen.

        Screaming "I told you so" at people while you sit on the sidelines. lelkek.

      • Society wants to be slaves.

        False. Society wants to be free. Free from the pointless drone for things which could rather be automated, e.g. check in processes.

    • chip implants will be superfluous and too easy to fool with minor surgery the panopticon will not require them

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nyet ( 19118 )

      Il est bien malaisé (puisqu’il faut enfin m’expliquer) d’ôter à des insensés des chaînes qu’ils révèrent.

    • The TSA's Precheck program is already this, just without the physical device under your skin. Bonus: just like Alexa, you get to pay for the privilege.

    • The chip implant. Most people are willingly going to do it and consider those who reject dumb, while they set themselves up as cattle in a slaughterhouse.

      Or maybe people just understand the base risks. Don't be so quick to lump them in as stupid. I lump in people who opt out of facial recognition as stupid. a) their facial recognition is already in a database (what do you think you're being compared to), and b) your presence is already being tracked (do you think there's less tracking by scanning your passport?).

  • One thing I have learned in my career is never give options for something I don't want to do.
    Sure if someone wants something different then my options they are free to request it, and Ill probably do it to the best of my ability. But giving people options, even (especially) bad ones there will be someone who will take a route that you didn't want to go, where they wouldn't have cared before.

    For most people they wold take facial recognition just to get into the plane faster. If they gave the people an option

    • Re:Sure they want the easiest way. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by liquid_schwartz ( 530085 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @12:47PM (#58868128)

      For most people they wold take facial recognition just to get into the plane faster.

      I fly regularly and ID / ticket scanning is not the pacing item for how quickly you can board a plane. Luggage in overheads and not boarding window -> aisle -> middle seat is.

      • Re:Sure they want the easiest way. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @01:30PM (#58868408)

        boarding window -> aisle -> middle seat is.

        Window-middle-aisle is how the military loads troops in aircraft. It is a very efficient process, especially if you place a gunnery sergeant at the hatch to manage the process.

        But I just don't see it working with civilians. Civilians are traveling with their families, or with friends, and don't want to be separated, even if just for boarding. Also, there is no civilian version of a gunnery sergeant.

        • Also, there is no civilian version of a gunnery sergeant.

          Woman on her period.

        • Some of them are - an awful lot though are traveling alone. It would be easy enough when assigning boarding groups to keep together groups that bought their tickets together. Load them all last, once they won't be holding up everyone else. Added incentive to click the "Board separately (and sooner)" checkbox when buying tickets.

        • I double don't see it happening due to the overhead luggage problem. Families are likely travelling together which means that any blockage in any given row is likely to be resolved in one go. By boarding window seat aisle instead of rear middle front which makes far more sense for non-military aircraft you'd end up with the same set of delays occurring more often during the boarding process.

      • I flew last week. Far more of our time was spent standing in a hot boarding ramp than scanning tickets. There is no speed advantage to facial recognition.

  • Scan passport vs face... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by torkus ( 1133985 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @12:41PM (#58868072)

    So you had them scan your passport which includes a picture of your face instead of your face itself...

    Where do you think the airports get the comparison images in the first place? Plus your passport has WAY more info on it (especially if it's a modern RF-enabled US passport) which links to pretty much everything about you (do not fly list etc.)

    So really, what exactly do you accomplish by avoiding a facial scan when the airport and airline already have that info and SO much more. Fight the good fight, sure...but this is a stupid fight.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      This ^^^ frankly I don't see the privacy issue here; they already have the images. That is the only reason the system works in the first place. Okay maybe they don't have a super recent image but that is about all you are really giving them.

      You already are NOT flying if they don't know, who you are, where you are going and where you have been recently.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Calydor ( 739835 )

        You are giving them a super recent image anyway by showing up because airports have SECURITY CAMERAS.

        John F. Smith checked in at 11:46:18. Check security footage at that time for an up to date image if you need it.

        • John F. Smith checked in at 11:46:18. Check security footage at that time for an up to date image if you need it.

          I think there’s a subtle but important difference here.

          The sequence you’ve described - how airport security has been done for many years - does not, by default, single me out. It does not directly attach my name to a photo of my face which is filed away interminably. If I do something wrong, the authorities can certainly work backwards and discover who I am - but it is not violating the principle of assumed innocence which is guaranteed me by the US Constitution - by default, I’m just one

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by torkus ( 1133985 )

            You're off into left field on the 'presumption of innocence' and entirely incorrect about it's implications in this case.

            Your personal, individual, identifiable picture is attached to your name on basically every and any piece of usable state/governmental ID already. Your passport (which is required for intl travel) absolutely does. You're already identified. Similarly, this is required to drive a car on a public road.

            Furthermore, the constitution does not require you remain anonymous in a crowd. Prett

            • Re:Scan passport vs face... (Score:4, Insightful)

              by postbigbang ( 761081 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @05:49PM (#58869690)

              And it's part of the security theater used ostensibly scare the bad guys. They'll argue all of this theater works, because look-- no hijackings in recent memory that were successful.

              There was a time you could just get on the plane. You could smoke in the back of the plane, and after take off, the entire place stunk of cigarette smoke. Everyone drank booze and worse, abused the stewardesses.

              Is it progress that we're herded like cattle into entirely full planes, cameras everywhere in the airport facility, ID and parcels/bags checked, only to have them checked yet again by facial recognition onto those crowded planes?

              Time and again, TSA fails their audits. Yes, they do catch the really stupid people, as in oops, this sword isn't a carry-on, and oops, my pistol had the safety on and don't I get credit for that??

              The definitions between public/private space are now moot, not that they should be. Only the elites get on their private jets and don't suffer the insults that the unwashed masses must endure. And as money speaks to the FAA, the congress, and the executive branch, nothing will be done. Your only choice is to continue to vote them out.

            • "an airport is usually a publicly-owned space, and a zero-freedom one at that"

              FTFY

          • how airport security has been done for many years - does not, by default, single me out.

            You've never shown your picture id to the check-in agent, nor have you shown your picture ID to the TSA agent at the security line.

            by default, I'm just one anonymous face in a crowd in a public space.

            You don't realize how absolutely hilarious you sound right now.

            Requiring that I allow them to - by default - save a picture of me with my name attached, just in case I might do something wrong,

            So you also don't have a passport.

            You don't realize that the facial recognition scanner at boarding isn't SAVING your picture, it is comparing a video image with an image that has already been saved. Except for you, because you have no government-issued picture IDs, right?

            The fellow in this story is wrong for tw

    • Re:Scan passport vs face... (Score:4, Informative)

      by PPH ( 736903 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @12:54PM (#58868174)

      Fight the good fight, sure

      This is an example of a false dilemma [wikipedia.org]. You think you've been given a choice, but in reality both amount to exactly the same outcome: They have your face on file. It might make a few people feel better about the situation. But it's just a pacifier.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by torkus ( 1133985 )

        Fight the good fight, sure

        This is an example of a false dilemma [wikipedia.org]. You think you've been given a choice, but in reality both amount to exactly the same outcome: They have your face on file. It might make a few people feel better about the situation. But it's just a pacifier.

        While you're pointing out logical fallacies, how about you don't quote out of context?

        Fight the good fight, sure...but this is a stupid fight.

        But hey, thanks for re-phrasing exactly what I said while making it seem like you're disagreeing because i'm wrong. Are you a politician or one in training perhaps?

    • Re:Scan passport vs face... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mrwireless ( 1056688 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @12:59PM (#58868192)

      While your point is valid, you ignore the damage these systems do on a cultural level. They normalize the existence of a surveillance culture.

      Secondly, a passport check is clearly delineated moment. You know when it happens, and you control when it does. With face detection, especially as it slowly becomes ubiquitous, you are less in control.

      You could argue this is a 'slippery slope' argument. But if you read Slashdot, you know we really are slipping further into surveillance capitalism every day.

      In the long run this is about citizen's rights to clearly know when they are tracked and checked. This is about what children grow up with and consider normal. Why should we have to pick which front we fight on? Let's fight on all of them.

      • Re:Scan passport vs face... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by torkus ( 1133985 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @01:11PM (#58868292)

        While I can agree on a limited basis of 'slippery slope' arguments, we're specifically talking about a use case where:

        - all the information is already in the hands of the airline
        - the same information is already being verified at the same time and place one way or another
        - you're already in a 'secure space' and have willingly submitted to much more intrusive things to get there

        If they start moving this outside secure spaces like...to get your takeout order then yah. But otherwise anything that makes flying simpler and faster I'm all for. We aren't giving anything up with this and airports are already a travesty of inefficiency. If this improves that without making any additional hits to privacy then let's have at it.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        While your point is valid, you ignore the damage these systems do on a cultural level. They normalize the existence of a surveillance culture.

        Secondly, a passport check is clearly delineated moment. You know when it happens, and you control when it does. With face detection, especially as it slowly becomes ubiquitous, you are less in control.

        Except it';s a false choice - as neither is mutually exclusive. They can do facial recognition already AND do a passport check. In fact, they already have all your pass

      • In the long run this is about citizen's rights to clearly know when they are tracked and checked

        Yeah, next thing you know they'll require us to bolt unique identifiers to the outside of our cars.

        Or to be less snarky, the anonymity you posit did not exist.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Joviex ( 976416 )

        While your point is valid, you ignore the damage these systems do on a cultural level. They normalize the existence of a surveillance culture.

        If you think we dont already live in a surveillance state, you need your scanner checked.

      • Re:Scan passport vs face... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by jrumney ( 197329 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @05:25PM (#58869568)
        What is being normalized here is computers making decisions about security instead of humans. Instead of a human looking at your passport and comparing with the person in front of them, we now delegate to the computer. For now, a rejection by the computer probably only falls back to the old human method, but how long before the computer is trusted over fallible humans, and people start seeing all aspects of their lives impacted because the computer cannot be wrong?

        • What is being normalized here is computers making decisions about security instead of humans. ... how long before the computer is trusted over fallible humans, and people start seeing all aspects of their lives impacted because the computer cannot be wrong?

          I'm a little sad that this isn't the discussion taking place in these comments. In the past, this would have been the whole discussion here.

        • but how long before the computer is trusted over fallible humans

          Forever, barring the brief period where it wasn't and some unlucky passenger sued an airline into oblivion.

    • The airport cant unlock my iphone using my passport picture. They can unlock my iphone using the facial recognition scan they do. Thats the difference.

      • The airport cant unlock my iphone using my passport picture. They can unlock my iphone using the facial recognition scan they do. Thats the difference.

        Then use a PIN. They are still an option if you fear misuse of biometric. Now let the rest of us get through the line faster.

        • Now let the rest of us get through the line faster.

          Yeah. Hurry up and get on that plane so you can wait for everyone else to get on.

          Hurry up and get to the next red light too.

          Schnell! Schnell!!

          • Yeah. Hurry up and get on that plane so you can wait for everyone else to get on.

            Yeah, hurry up and get on the plane so you can get some of the limited overhead space, get a blanket and pillow, find an inflight magazine with an unworked crossword, plug in your electronics, put on your noise cancelling headphone, and then sit comfortably while other people get on, instead of standing in line with bags on your shoulders behind a moron couple who are arguing over who has the passports while they're searching through their carry-on to find them, even after announcements telling everyone to

      • The airport cant unlock my iphone using my passport picture. They can unlock my iphone using the facial recognition scan they do. Thats the difference.

        If you fly with your phone, they can demand to take it out of your sight and who knows what they did, or how easy it is for them to unlock their copy of your phone.

        If you want to retain the ability to make representations about your phone, you can't even bring it with you into the airport.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 228e2 ( 934443 )
      Also to your point, if you're flying internationally, you're letting them take your picture when you come into Customs anyways.

    • Indeed, this is a major flaw in the logic. In fact, itâ(TM)s entirely counter intuitive as in many international airports there passive cameras that can take facial images while your passport is being scanned thereby essentially identifying you in detail and providing all the images the system might require to passively identify you in the future.

      This technology is here to stay. There is no way and no point in trying to counter this unless you are prepared to go and live off the grid and never emerge

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by torkus ( 1133985 )

        Heck, many intl airports include a kiosk at immigration that you have to LET take your picture just in case you aren't on file.

        It's easy to avoid the biometrics at airports - just don't go to one and don't fly. Ever.

  • What was accomplished by the extra trouble? Nothing. They already have your face.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by vux984 ( 928602 )

      "What was accomplished by the extra trouble? Nothing. They already have your face."

      You are giving them additional data points to work with going forward for other purposes. Your face is not like a credit card number. It's constantly in motion, viewed under different lighting, at different angles, with different makeup, facial hair, etc.

      So yes, they have your passport photo - a single image taken possibly up to 10 years ago.

      Now, if every time you fly, you give them a NEW image to add to their dataset they wi

      • This will dramatically improve their ability to perform facial recognition on you from various other sources -- surveillance/security camera footage, police body cam footage, and other imagery. Still think its 'nothing' ??

        Yes. Because I'm not going to go on a fascist binge and beat up people who disagree with me on politics. So if the police have a good photo I don't care.

        And don't bother attempting to argument the antifa is "anti fascist", they are anti about as much as the "german national socialists" were socialist; well the pro-violence wing of antifa that is, the nonviolent wing is anti, combating stupidity with peaceful protest like civilized people.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Kohath ( 38547 )

        They can see your face from 50 angles at the airport. They can update their images and their data as many times as they want.

        You want protection from government overreach at the airport, you need to reform the government. Hiding from facial recognition at the airport is futile, obviously.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by vux984 ( 928602 )

          "They can see your face from 50 angles at the airport."

          Those are images that need to be TIED to something.

          The one of you boarding, you are affirmatively linking that to your passport/profile.

          That's the profile they are using to guess where all the rest of the pictures they are taking belong.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Kohath ( 38547 )

            Those are images that need to be TIED to something.

            They have facial recognition and your image data from your passport photo. They know you are at the airport to board the plane because you are on the passenger manifest and you showed your passport to the TSA.

            They can get your image walking through the airport from as many angles as they want, use facial recognition to link it to your passport data, and take all the images from all the angles to refine and update their original image data.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by vux984 ( 928602 )

              "use facial recognition to link it to your passport data"

              Sure, but that's all best guess AI etc; and the one on your passport doesn't look like you that day.

              The one when you board is current, looks like you that day, and you affirmatively link it to your password. The AI for that one just needs to match vs passengers not all people in airport (many of whom are not passengers or staff), and if the AI gets that one wrong you and the airline staff will correct it.

              That allows it to MUCH more accurately link all

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Kohath ( 38547 )

                The one when you board is current, looks like you that day, and you affirmatively link it to your password. The AI for that one just needs to match vs passengers not all people in airport (many of whom are not passengers or staff),

                I am not an expert, but I will guess that you look more like you than other people in an airport look like you. They probably have very good, up-to-date image data on the people who work at the airport. The number of wrong guesses shouldn't be high enough to be a problem. Perhaps I am incorrect about that though.

            • "They have facial recognition and your image data from one of the many gestapo databases."

              FTFY

      • Now, if every time you fly, you give them a NEW image to add to their dataset they will gradually get a much larger set of images of you.

        So I hate to burst your bubble, but airports have been covered by tons of security cameras for a very long time now. Scanning your passport/ticket gives them the timestamp, and camera feeds give them lots of images from many angles.

  • What wan't Easy? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zizzybaluba ( 5655632 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @12:43PM (#58868090)
    Title: "It Wasn't Easy" Body of Article: "All I had to do was ask."

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by torkus ( 1133985 )

      Don't you know the rules? You need a catchy title that is vaguely related to the article where you (occasionally) explain the facts.

      That's how things work today.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Jack9 ( 11421 )

      Was there any assurance that the face scanner didn't record their face anyway? Nope. While I'm sure "asking" was trivial, imo, I'm not sure it achieved what they think it did.

      • While I'm sure "asking" was trivial, imo, I'm not sure it achieved what they think it did.

        It is unclear as to what an "Allie Funk" actually does. "Research analyst at Freedom on the Net" is a pretty meaningless job description. All we have is the self-reported "privacy-conscious person" to know what level of understanding this person has.

        Apparently it is pretty low. Just asking to opt-out is "not easy", so everything in life must be pretty complicated for her.

        But if this person, who writes OPINION pieces (which this was) for Wired, actually understood anything, then yes, it achieved exactly

    • Thanks, was going to say the same thing - and he made it more complex than it had to me. My personal inflation would have simply been to ask to scan the passport or boarding pass instead of the face scan when you were boarding (which is what he ended up doing).

      But as others have said, it's a pretty silly request because whatever they scan has the same level of info about you (you have to provide a passport number well ahead of boarding). All the facial scanning is doing is verifying who is getting on the

      • All the facial scanning is doing is verifying who is getting on the place so they have a complete manifest of passengers.

        They have a manifest because they still scan the boarding pass as you get on.

        It's actually a pretty simple way of keeping bad guys from gaming the system to leave the country illegally. If you have to show a passport (or be facially identified as that person) as you get on then you can't just swap boarding passes with someone who doesn't have a passport or isn't supposed to leave the country and let them take your flight.

  • While I generally agree with the general privacy concerns of the author regarding facial recognition, I was disappointed to find that the article didn't really describe what the opt-out procedure was. The author talked about how the ability to opt out was "hidden" because it wasn't announced over the public address system, but the author did not say how easy or hard the actual opt out procedure was. If the opt out procedure was actually simple as in you just show your passport to the human standing next to

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by torkus ( 1133985 )

      He did though. He went and asked, then they scanned his passport (with his picture lol) instead of his face.

    • I guess I (and probably you too) fell for the clickbait part. There is no difficulty described in TFA, except in the title. Also there is no "attempt" described in TFA at all, only in /. title.
      I do not know which was the bigger shame, clickbait being there or "a researcher" is not aware that government(s) have his/her facial recognition data already provided by him/herself with biometric picture. So if there is a privacy issue (and there actually is one in my opinion) that is long pass since governments al

    • but the author did not say how easy or hard the actual opt out procedure was.

      She said that she had to "get out of line" and talk to a Delta agent, and then just asked the agent at the boarding gate to actually opt out. Sounds real hard to me. Real. Like, impossible level of hard. Not.

  • When I've used facial recognition at airports it's been comparing my face to the photo in the passport, in the same way that handing it to someone in a booth would do. Is the story that there's a secret database somewhere that everyone is on and that's being used?
    • OK, just read the article (reading the article and replying to my own post, very bad), and it seems that your face is being compared to the photograph which was used for your passport or visa application. Which seems a legitimate way to do it.

  • willing to bet the researcher still got facial scanned without their knowledge.

  • No surprise (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mr100percent ( 57156 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @01:05PM (#58868250) Homepage Journal

    The TSA is ABSOLUTELY trying to disincentivize opting out. They also did the same for the nude body scanners, saying that they wanted to make it longer and less convenient to opt for a pat-down instead.

    • Phuleese, the TSA doesn't give a shit. There's no more or less data collected or verified by the TSA using the opt out method vs the face scanner. Yes you're right about the scanners, but dead wrong in this case. It's the airline alone trying to reduce staffing costs by automating a portion of the boarding process.

  • If you don't think you are... go ahead. avoid paying those taxes, try to stop being a citizen without paying the exit tax. You can run, but hiding is a bit more difficult now.

  • After the whole thing was over with... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BringsApples ( 3418089 ) on Wednesday July 03, 2019 @01:12PM (#58868298)

    ...the researcher logged into facebook to voice his frustration.

  • *After* the Boston Bombing, the FBI did a truly fantastic job of tracking down the perpetrators in a remarkably short time.
    *After* the attacks in London on 7/7, the UK Metropolitan Police did a fantastic job of identifying the terrorists.
    *After* the Paris attacks, the French Security Services were really quick to identify that survivors and accomplices had already left the country.

    When it comes to our personal safety in public spaces, the very best that we can reasonably hope for is that, in the event o

    • To spell it out for everyone: this approach is never going to be reliable as a preventative measure to stop attacks or security issues

      Only if you start time when the facial recognition happens.

      But that's not when time started. The passenger manifest has been provided to the government long before your flight, and there's been a cursory check on whether or not someone "interesting" is on the flight. The ticket/facial scan just ensures that the manifest that was checked matches the actual passengers that are on the plane.

  • The airport is full of cameras that could easily have facial recognition implanted on them, if they don't already. If you travel abroad, you already get a face scan upon re-entry to make sure it matches your passport.

    If you don't want to be on camera, don't go near any public building.

  • how they already have your picture.

    A 3D facial scan is not the same thing. These find all kinds of geometry unique to your face that a flat 2D image doesn't have.

    This shit is already in use in totalitarian dictatorships like China to fuck over dissidents. Once they have this image what else will they use it for that you will have no knowledge of and no way of "opting out" of?

  • Get put on a watchlist for the rest of their lives.

Slashdot Top Deals

To be awake is to be alive. -- Henry David Thoreau, in "Walden"

Close