What’s the big deal? You had to give them your Federal ID anyway. The government already knows where you are going what tine you checked in and they have multiple copies of your ID on the state and federal level if you have a passport.
What’s the big deal? You had to give them your Federal ID anyway. The government already knows where you are going what tine you checked in and they have multiple copies of your ID on the state and federal level if you have a passport.
Given how many pictures governments and corporations collect from public places, the GP's concern seems moot. I'll try to articulate my reasons as follows:
- In every authentication system (the airports' face scanning ones and others) there's a point at which a yes/no decision must be made: is this person authentic or is not?
- This yes/no "decision module" must base its determination solely on a series of bits presented to it by the image sensor.
- Every series of bits can be spoofed because the decision module can't tell whether the bits originated from a real image sensor or from a very convincing AI or elsewhere. The only exception to this is when the bits include a cryptographic signature, generated using a private key, securely embedded within the image sensor.
- The chance of such spoofing is minuscule if the sensor and the decision module coexist within a single piece of hardware that's tamper-proof. The decision module for airport face scanners can't be, given the large number of faces that must be queried. When such a decision module and its image sensor are separated by a network, possibilities for intrusion and spoofing can no longer be ignored.
- A helpful analogy is how we decry passwords stored as plain text in backend databases; after the inevitable compromise, these passwords get used to attack other systems. If backend systems store face data as a set of images (as I believe most do), how's that different in principle from storing passwords in a DB, in plain text?
- I'll grant that a careful designed system will allay my fears. The backend should store nothing but salted hashes and the image sensors must send only signed images of the subject.
- Stepping back, my ultimate concern with face authentication systems is that their technical details are opaque and they're used in situations where recourse is limited at best.
> Given how many pictures governments and corporations collect from public places, the GP's concern seems moot.
That data is not centralized. If anytime you entered a gas station surveillance footage of you were associated with your passport and added to a centralized registry, I think you'd be worried too. That's what's going on here.
Yet. Flock, et al is working on that. My brother in law runs a tie company. His trucks all roll with LPR, and they get pings on the location of repo vehicles in seconds.
At the government level, slot of the Palantir work is (often illegally) joining all sorts of data for total awareness.
Where you are every minute is centralized if you use a cell phone. Even if your phone isn’t sending GPS data back somewhere, it’s still constantly pinging cell phone towers.
The big deal is that you are coerced into giving up extremely detailed and personal information. Your face at a security checkpoint or gate does not look identical to your face on your passport. Happy, sad, frustrated, tired? Last time you shaved? Stubble or beard? Hair in a mess? Glasses? Use and style of makeup (for women)? Dental status? Stained teeth? If you're dumb enough to smile or if they force you to in the future (for "security reasons")? One or more pimples?
All of the above is contained in a SINGLE photo. MULTIPLE such photos every time you fly tell a whole lot about you. Way more than I'm comfortable giving up to companies and governments I don't trust will handle the data responsibly.
So you’re concerned with the number of photos with regards to tracking even though the government already has your ID with your photo and they can easily find out everywhere you went if you carry a cell phone?
I’ve gone through security over a dozen times in the last year and never had a problem with it recognizing my face. My wife changes hairstyles very often and it doesn’t have an issue. These are solved problems.
What extremely sensitive information? Your photo they already have?
If you don't understand the difference between ONE photo and DOZENS of photos taken over several years, I can't help you. Go troll someone else.
And what exactly threat do you think you are avoiding by not having more pictures taken of you? Honestly,if you carry your phone around with you or using credit cards, worrying about extra photos is completely non sensical tin foil hat wearing territory.