Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956
A new tool launched by privacy activists offers to help travelers avoid increasingly invasive facial recognition technologies in airports.
Activist groups Fight for the Future, Demand Progress and CREDO on Wednesday unveiled a new website called AirlinePrivacy.com, which shows users what airlines use facial recognition to verify the identity of passengers before boarding. The site also helps customers to directly book flights with airlines that don't use facial recognition technologies.
[...] Though biometric boarding programs are not a security requirement for flights in the US, many passengers may not know they can decline its use. In most cases, the technology is implemented on an opt-out basis, meaning passengers are automatically enrolled unless they instruct otherwise.
The opt-out basis of the programs puts the onus of maintaining privacy on the consumer, who may not know they are being tracked to begin with, said Tihi Hayslett, a senior campaigner at Demand Progress, another activist group.
[...] Wednesday's launch of the website comes as scrutiny of facial recognition technologies has heightened. In May, San Francisco became the first city in the United states to ban the use of facial recognition technology. Shareholders of Amazon have been pushing the company to stop selling facial recognition technology to law enforcement. A 2016 Georgetown University study found roughly 117 million people's identities are already in facial recognition databases and there is minimal legal instruction on how that data can be used.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jun/05/airlines-facial-recognition-privacy
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:02PM (2 children)
If facial recognition gets outlawed, only outlaws will have facial recognition, isn't it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:20PM
I am not a data point, and it is not OK!
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:54PM
I'd be fine with that.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:12PM (1 child)
So where were folks like this when airlines started groping everyone or using nudie cameras? If airplanes are so potentially dangerous that airports have to go to all these steps, then it's probably better to just not fly.
Of course, you know, in a few more years facial recognition will be everywhere. Every store in the US will have it. Functionally, it will make those old tracking cards (loyalty/discount/euphemism cards) obsolete. They will pay good money to have those interlinked with every other facial recognition system so they can have as much marketing details as possible.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Mer on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:52PM
If they are implementing it as opt-out it means they bought your facial data from somewhere to begin with.
Meaning it's affecting everyone, even those who never flew in their life. It's a whole new dimension of suck.
Shut up!, he explained.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Rupert Pupnick on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:33PM (10 children)
I’m totally opposed to deployment of this kind of technology in public spaces, but if you gave me the choice, I’d prefer to fly on an airline WITH facial recognition technology. It’s not like you don’t have to identify yourself to get on an airplane!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Taibhsear on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:34PM (2 children)
Why do they need facial recognition when we all have passports and state ids/driver's licenses?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:21PM
Fakes. 'Nuff said.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @02:17AM
WHOOOOOOSHHHH!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:40PM (6 children)
Right, and we should end that, too. You should be able to fly anonymously.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:20PM (3 children)
Yep. Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram, Aleph, ISIL... let em all on whatever airlines you like. That'll show 'em!
Next, in Stupid Ideas, cliff diving into rocks from 100 feet up! You can go first, AC!
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday June 07 2019, @01:36AM (2 children)
I'd fly on an airline that opted out of BS security theatre and nudie scanners. Call it Terrorist Air for all I care. Simple metal detectors, to keep the crazies with guns and knives at bay, as they had for decades before 9/11.
Fun fact: for almost a decade after 9/11 you could fly domestically without ID, as you always could. We used to have a "right to free travel" within the U.S. No "papers please!" just to travel.
And yet, even though you could fly without ID (you just told the TSA you forgot it), amazingly no major terrorist incidents after 9/11. And let's not forget the 9/11 terrorists had proper ID....
Mr. AC you've been hoodwinked by unnecessary security theatre.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday June 07 2019, @01:59AM (1 child)
The terrist will just carry 3D printed plastic guns and knives!
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday June 08 2019, @03:40PM
So? Let them on the plane. An extraordinary number of knives and guns get on planes these days past the TSA anyway.
The metal detectors before 9/11 were still a bit of security theatre. More efficient and effective than today's, but they weren't perfect either. The point is setting up a small barrier that acts as a deterrent to obvious thugs. Having SOME surveillance is a deterrent.
Given the TSA failure rate since its inception at detecting contraband at almost every security audit, it should be very clear to any terrorist out there that if they really are determined, they could easily get stuff on a plane (or at least have a better than 50-50 chance at it). The fact that we don't see terrorists on planes every week is basically proof that the fear is overstated.
So, the metal detectors aren't there to protect us from terrorists. They're there to protect us from stupid people who might get a stupid idea in their heads one day and screw up everyone's flight as they demand "one million dollars" in Dr. Evil style while asking for passage to Cuba.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:52PM
Fortunately, airline security considerations are not so heavily influenced by ideology or market forces.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @03:36AM
Sure. In how many separate parts and for how long before landing with a thump?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:41PM (1 child)
but we won't tell you how
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:38PM
Of course they will. The instructions are clearly displayed in the cellar at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.’
Can’t miss it.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:53PM (7 children)
So, how do you avoid airports that use Facial Recognition Tech (can somebody please shorten the name to something a bit more catchy)?
This is so silly. You have no privacy. To maintain a balance of power, we have to subject all the authorities to the same transparency they demand from us. We shouldn't be allowing them to operate in secret anyway. Take away their advantage, and all will be well.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:05PM (2 children)
Facefuck work for you? It's good enough for Zuck!
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:09PM (1 child)
Let's keep it classy, eh? There are children in the audience.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:12PM
*looking around*
Those ankle biters have sugar teats and Hot Wheels cars to keep them occupied.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:45PM (2 children)
>So, how do you avoid airports that use Facial Recognition Tech (can somebody please shorten the name to something a bit more catchy)?
I propose calling it FaRT.
It's an easy to pronounce, one-syllable, acronym.
And it connotes something that smells bad and is offensive.
Downside: It will give flatulence a bad reputation.
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:06PM (1 child)
I'm sure it'll catch on, once the media get wind of it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @10:42AM
Not to blow my own trumpet, but I immediately thought of that acronym too.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:15PM
CamSpy
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:16PM (4 children)
Any chance that https://www.airlineprivacy.com/ [airlineprivacy.com] could start a boycott?
Looking at the site today, it's pretty slim, but I can already choose to avoid jetBlue, Delta and AA at my airport (which is not a big hub).
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:06PM (3 children)
I've been boycotting airlines for nearly two decades.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:22PM (1 child)
I know this is insulting, but I do mean it as a compliment.
This is the first time I've ever respected your principles.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @03:38AM
Nah, the boycott is actually not "on principles". Just that he landed on the no-fly-list early.
(Score: 2, Informative) by anubi on Friday June 07 2019, @02:03AM
My disgust with airlines was a significant driver to my purchasing my big diesel van. I intend to avoid airports in my retirement years. I intend to travel a lot and see a lot of stuff for myself and hopefully a significant other.
At ground level and no TSA around.
That last experience I had over my fathers funeral I will not forget easily. To me, it was all for show, and I was not in the least entertained.
The whole theater appeared to me as the the equivalent of installing ultra high security locks on a bathroom stall. It does not require a gun to wreak havoc.
If my intention was to wreak havoc, I could have still done so. All they really did was piss me off with all that clownery.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 3, Touché) by Phoenix666 on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:12PM
Guess I'll have to start wearing my burka again.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:14PM (2 children)
You have already consented to make your identity known to the carrier (and TSA and....) by choosing to purchase a ticket. You are already granting your consent to be tracked while you are on airport grounds - security can follow you with cameras or tail you in person on the grounds of the airport without cause. Someone claiming they have to make you aware (which I'm sure is on really fine print at the entrance of the airport and/or as part of the ticketing process anyway) can prove in law where that is the case. They have every right to run cameras and photograph you already; I don't like that but someone saying it's not right or legal needs to prove that.
You already do not have the choice of how you wish to identify yourself to them - they mandate to you how you shall acceptably identify yourself to them and they determine what is an acceptable form of identification. Any such identification will have your picture on it already. There is no law I am aware of prohibiting them (TSA, the airport authority, or the airline) from scanning or copying your identification and retaining that data. You have already identified yourself to TSA with your boarding pass, and as such your boarding pass does becomes an identification document which you must turn over at the gate.
If this were about asking for a fingerprint or a blood/urine/DNA sample I might feel differently. If this is that they have an existing database of faces they are using from some context other than criminal records (as a criminal you do not have the right to not have had your photograph taken and used) that's something different. (Querying an authority like passports or drivers licenses once you have purchased your ticket is fine, though... again, you have given them the right to know who you are to identify you).
The system doesn't say what the sourcing is, by the way.... Are they taking your photo at the airport, or querying some already existing source? They only say they have the right to retain your image for 12 hours if you're a citizen and infinite if you are not. (I do not like that non-citizens are treated differently and can see that as a sticking point). Again, though, it's not different from other ways your data might be retained.
What exactly is the ethical difference between what they were doing and what they are doing now?
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:53PM (1 child)
The problem is scale
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @10:44AM
Have you tried a moisturizing cream?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @07:24PM (1 child)
Real simple: Don't fly.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Friday June 07 2019, @02:00AM
The website will soon just redirect to a Wikipedia list of all airlines.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]