- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- Travelers can opt out of facial recognition at US airports by requesting manual ID verification, though resistance or intimidation may occur.
- Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches, misidentification, and normalization of surveillance.
- The Algorithmic Justice League’s “Freedom Flyers” campaign aims to raise awareness of these issues and encourage passengers to exercise their right to opt out.
You must log in or register to comment.
Stupid privacy people. What’s the worst that could happen? A fascist coming into power next year who could misuse the data?
Stupid privacy people. What’s the worst that could happen? Surveillance companies that have already scoured the internet for photos of people to build a giant database of people?
It’s also not like they could ever use the hundreds of other cameras all over the airports. What would they do with all that data anyways?
Minority Report
Opt out. If we don’t exercise our rights, we lose them.
"What if they retaliate and make life difficult for me? "
That’s both illegal and against policy. If someone delays your right to travel for this specific reason, delay their job by asking for their supervisor and their name and employee number. Then file a complaint. That will dissuade that public servant (and their leadership) from exhibiting such behavior and encouraging it respectively.
“But they are capturing your image in 10 skillion other public locations.”
- Sure, and you have the option to create your own privacy in public.
- Further, what’s the real purpose of the scanner at the TSA check if they already have that detailed image of your retina, your facial pore patterns and whatever the fsck else they store? They don’t have that level of detail yet on CCTV.
If you don’t care, then that’s fine. Some people don’t mind the slow encroachments on 4th Amendment protections. Cool. Others do. Cool also. That’s why we can opt out.
There should exist a law that orders privacy by default forcing all this intrusive stuff to bi opt-in instead of opt-out. With data, it is often to late if it is only opt-out…
Agreed. This was rolled out without any regard whatsoever for people’s interest in data privacy. That kind of entitled behavior from any government agency is just plain gross.
I’m okay with the TSA scan (pre-check) since… you know… they already have you if you took a picture for your ID.
Those “clear” people however. Who TF thinks it’s a good idea to hand your biometric info to a corp?
How did you get into TSA Pre without providing fingerprints? I tried once, and they strictly refused to let me apply because I wouldn’t give fingerprints.
Well, I’ve had DLs in multiple states and they all required fingerprints. The little digital ones. Maybe that’s not the case everywhere though.
Oh, weird. They don’t require prints for a DL in TX, but we’re already closing in on an authoritarian state anyways. I didn’t know this was a thing.
It probably has to do with whether the driver’s license is Real ID compliant or not. Here in Minnesota, you have the option of getting the Real ID license that can be used as a federal ID card for things like flying, or the regular old driver’s license which soon will really only be good for showing you’re allowed to drive a car.
I only have the regular driver’s license so I don’t know what all getting the Read ID involves, but having your biometric data scanned and stored seems like something they’d require.
Texas is real id compliant. Has been for like seven years iirc
Clear is now a TSA “vendor” for the precheck process. The machines they use for the sign up process - at least the airport I was at - don’t have the eye scanning camera in the kiosk.
The Clear representative I was asking questions of had said they don’t require eye scans for Clear, though that is the default. People can ask to use just fingerprints, which he said does disrupt the terminal process as the agents don’t think to ask if fingerprints were what was registered when the eye scans fail.
I am not advocating for Clear. I refuse to use them. I simply do want to call out that they are one of 3 who handle the process for the TSA now. People do have a choice of which of the three to use.
There’s no way my ID photo would work for facial recognition. I don’t plan on giving them anything new before I’m forced to
As I said. They already have it.
So then why do they need it again?
Isn’t reducing the size of the dataset worth it? I’d rather them have a picture from three years ago than a new scan every month or two.
Like I get it, it’s scary and I don’t want them to have my data, but my picture is being taken ALL the time basically everywhere I go. Is putting my foot down for this specific type really making a difference?
Put your foot down everywhere then – it’s a fallacy to think that it’s not worth it to resist data harvesting because it already gets collected “everywhere” anyway, take one step at a time to make it harder and harder. Opting out of this is just one step.
It’s the only real way to push back that other folks will notice if enough of us do it.
Last time I went through DC a few weeks ago they were using these. I saw a sign saying you’re welcome to opt out. Nobody even questioned what they were doing and were just going along. When it was my turn I politely said I’d rather not do the scan. Dude just glanced at my ID and waved me through. The next few folks behind me blinked and said they didn’t want the scan either. If enough people push back it can at least maybe slow down the normalization of constant surveillance.
I have global entry, so they already have my biometric data. I’d love to not here scanned, but this point it wouldn’t be anything they didn’t already have.
I did this during an international trip last year coming back into the country. The guy mostly seemed confused and kind of suspicious, but it was nbd.
They will potentially take you out of line to a side room to hand you off to someone else. It seemed to be an area where they deal with any oddball kind of things. There was a lady ahead of me who was more raucus and upset about some issue with her ID. The guy who checked mine mainly seemed kind of bemused, like it was unusual.
Be prepared for “We have the biometric data from your photo already, why do you care?”
You’re not obligated to give them a super detailed justification. Just remain polite and unconfrontational, and explain that you prefer not use the system as long as the right remains afforded to you to opt out.
(Note, this right only extends to US citizens)
Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches,
I know you’re using the acceptable legal term.
As a Cybersecurity person, the “potential” data breaches we talk about, today, are really pretty certain, at this point, in history.
We may work towards a collective genuine ‘potential’, where the breach might never happen, someday, with effort.
Turns chair around and sits straddling it like a cool youth mentor.
Y’alls faces at airports are definitely getting leaked on the dark web.
The good news is it might take enough years to leak that your appearance might happen to change in between.
The last time I flew they did this, but there was a huge sign that said photos are immediately deleted after verification…is this not true?
It’s discussed in the article. We can’t really be sure if they do, but they already store the measurements of your face along with other bits of metadata. They could reconstruct your face with it even without the photo. It’s a deceptive claim, because even if they throw away the camera video they still have your face for all intents and purposes.
Just for example, that’s an easy way to save just the biometric signature and have very few people question it.
Also, bureaucratic lies can be technically true. They copy the photo from the original device to a database, then delete the photo on the device. So it’s technically true the photo was immediately deleted, it’s just also copied and persisted forever. And a bureaucrat will proudly stand in front of you all day and tell you they deleted the photo, and they will sleep well that night with not any concern
Judge would declare that unlawful on the spot but without malicious intent whoever did it would have qualified immunity since a judge hasn’t already ruled on that specific case so it’s a wash.
isn’t politics and bureaucracy great.
“Normies” avoiding scanning their face is useless because the vast majority of them still use Instagram and other social media services full of surveillance
I’ve never posted any pictures of my face online. But I’m sure many data brokers have them. And some family members many years ago I’m sure posted some.
Planes <<<<<< trains.
They are very much incomparable more so than they are comparable. Try taking a train over a sea or across a country like the US.
Agreed, but they’ll inevitably fuck those up too.
You’re too smart for this site. I too love taking trains across both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans!
I’d actually love to take some sort of sea train, underground tunnel or floating death wave train one day. It wouldn’t be relaxing, peaceful, or cheap. But it would be an adventure.
Hour vs. hour it’s the best form of transportation
You get more space, there’s no TSA, you don’t get charged for bringing luggage, you can carry on liquids, you get leg room, the wifi is decent.
But if I’m traveling a really far distance… For example, if I’m going from California to New York I’d rather go by plane. Going by train for that seems to be pretty horrible. America is in desperate need of a ground transportation that can get from California to New York quickly.
If we put in a mag-lev system that averages 250 mph from station to station, an overnight sleeper train across the country becomes extremely attractive.
There is a sleeper train from Amsterdam to Vienna, last 2 / 3 years I checked it was sold out almost everyday. It seems like the perfect mode of transport
if I’m going from California to New York
Yup, that’s like 70-80 hours, depending on where in CA you’re leaving from. So you’ll be on that train for 3 days, and have to change trains 2-4 times. The plus side is that it’s cost-competitive w/ flying ($400-ish, vs $200-ish flying), but that’s for coach, so you’d spend those 3 days sleeping in a chair. If you want a sleeper room, that’s like $2k.
A direct flight would take 5-ish hours and cost $200-ish.
There’s a reason nobody rides trains in the US, and it’s because it takes way too long and it’s too expensive. It would be a fun experience, but not great if you’re using it for transportation.
For distances >600km, flying is usually 4x-10x faster at a similar price. At least in and around Germany. I assume in the US trains compare way worse, also because the distances are way larger.
Examples: “Normal” example: Stuttgart (Germany) -> Amsterdam (Netherlands) Train: 11h 10min - 241€ Plane: 1h 20min - 225€
Best case scenario for train in Germany at around that distance (because there’s a direct connection): München -> Berlin Train: 3h 54min - 167€ Plane: 1h 5min - 226€
I’m going to assume they can you the moment you walk into the airport.
I used to be extra during the TSA body scan BS. And honestly, I felt like they won.
They’ll always win because they can just prevent you from flying.
They pulled me in a private room when I refused to body scan and my bag was suspicious.
It was an extra 25 minutes. Enough to be inconvenient as they tried to find two available TSA agents willing to body check me then check every single item in my suitcase.
That’s the fun part about the war for privacy. We have already lost and if you make a big deal about it they’re just going to make your life hell!
And we lost it under W and the patriot act.
It’s not such a binary thing as winning or losing, it’s a constantly shifting process. The only way to actually lose is by giving up – instead, consider it making it as hard as possible for your privacy to be infringed upon. Sometimes it’s more inconvenient, but what makes us such a farmable populace is our reluctance to be inconvenienced. Be good at being uncomfortable.
I still opt out of those scans to this day. Why stop?
I tried to refuse the face scan and they looked at me like I just grew eye stalks. After a long pause, I said never mind I need to catch this flight, let’s do it.
It’s not a hill I’m willing to die on, even though I’m disappointed with the practice.
I refused, it went fine. I had to repeat myself because it was unexpected and dudebro wasn’t prepared, and they had to turn on the other machine and wait for it to start up, but it only delayed me like 2 minutes. The more people ask, the easier it gets.
You’re already on hundreds of cameras by walking into any airport in the world. Do they need your consent to run facial recognition software on the security footage?
I used to work for a company that did various kinds of biometric recognition. I unfortunately was paraded past these cameras many times for testing purposes, so my face was compromised many moons ago.
We had two kinds of products we installed in airports. When looking at large crowds most airports wanted cameras that would monitor the flow of traffic, determining if there were any bottlenecks causing people to arrive at their gate (or baggage claim) after their luggage.
The other product was facial recognition for identification purposes. These are the machines you have to stand right next to. There are various legal reasons airports did not want to use any crowd-level cameras for identification. They hadn’t obtained consent, but also, the low resolution per face would lead to many more false positives. It was also too costly.
But we did have high def cameras installed in strategic locations at large music halls. These private companies were less concerned with privacy and more concerned with keeping banned individuals out of their property. In those cases, we registered faces of people who were kicked out for various reasons and ignored all other faces.
My point I guess is twofold: first, you might not be facially tracked in as many places as you think you are. Second, eventually you will be and there’s not a whole lot we can do to stop it. For many years, Target has identified people with their payment card, used facial recognition to detect when they return to the store, and used crowd tracking to see where in the store you go (and sometimes they have even changed ad displays based on the demographics of people standing nearby).
Mostly, you will be identified and tracked when there is financial incentive to do so.
I refuse to go through the body scanners, but the last time I went through the airport there wasn’t anyone trying to opt-out. I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything, this won’t either.
I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything
You mean the backscatter X-ray units that have already been phased out 10 years ago?
The modern milimeter-wave scanners both do not reveal anything and do not use ionising radiation. If radiation is a concern to you, you really shouldn’t be flying at all to be honest. The dose you get up there is much higher than you’d get from an X-ray scanner, although it is still negligible.
she cute
For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, with some exceptions.
Which exceptions?
Canada is one, last I heard.
I’ll bet one of the exceptions is having a bunch of money.
I remember when travelling in the US (Im a foreigner) there was a vip pass thingy to skip lines and enter without even talking to a migration officer (I think). Really seemed like a rich person pass
Yeah, there are two different programs. One is for domestic flights and one is for domestic and international.
I did the domestic flight one once because it was free with my credit card.
But I had to fill out some forms and interview in person.
I only got to use it once because they vip lanes were always closed.
It’s only worth it if you need to travel a lot.
Additionally, I’ve never really suffered long lines through airport security.
The long lines are typically at immigrations and you can’t skip those outside of being a diplomat or private jet rich.
They can skip it yeah, that’s the whole point of the international one
https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs/global-entry
And you can also skip them if an employee gives you TCC pass when your connecting flight will leave soon so you need to get there fast (had that happen to me once)
I’m Canadian and I used to have a pass like that. It was $50 at the time and valid for 5 years.
Hey everyone, this guy’s loaded!
Dumbass article, if you go to an airport your face is all over the security cameras and the checkpoints delete your image immediately after scanning so they are the least of your worries.
the checkpoints delete your image immediately after scanning so they are the least of your worries.
I’m going to need a source on this bullshit lie.
Source: the signs on the device itself at an airport I saw last week, also the TSA website https://www.tsa.gov/digital-id
The photo is immediately deleted unless clear signage is posted ndicating that the checkpoint is undergoing testing as results may be retained for up to 24mo.
How do you know it is auto deleted?
What if it relies on specific personnel to actively purge the database? What if said personnel are poorly trained, low pay, exteme limited time, and simply does not care?
How likely does a TSA agent fall under all of those criteria? (Hint: very likely)
Edit: here’s the fucking clincher directly from their website
During periodic testing and development, TSA and DHS Office of Science and Technology (S&T) may retain passenger data for up to 24 months.
I am pretty sure I read somewhere that they plan to test this system for the next decade. So technically they don’t delete anything due to being a long as fuck period of “testing”.
Well if that is the case at your specific airport, you’d know because it would say as much on the sign. You know, like it says in the sentence immediately following the line you quoted.
That testing period, plus 24 months
