You can opt out of airport face scans
Passengers can opt out of airport facial recognition for US domestic flights by following specific steps. Challenges faced during opt-out prompt the Algorithmic Justice League's "Freedom Flyers" campaign. Concerns include data security, bias, and surveillance normalization. Opting out advocates for biometric rights.
Read original articlePassengers have the right to opt out of facial recognition technology at airports, especially for domestic flights in the US. By standing away from the camera, covering the face with a mask, presenting ID, and stating the desire to opt out, individuals can choose the standard verification process instead. However, reports indicate that some passengers have faced resistance or intimidation when attempting to opt out. The Algorithmic Justice League has launched a campaign called "Freedom Flyers" to raise awareness of this right. Concerns about facial recognition technology include data breaches, misidentification, and bias, particularly affecting people of color. The normalization of surveillance and potential long-term implications of facial recognition technology at airports are also highlighted. Despite uncertainties about data deletion and privacy, experts recommend continuing to opt out of face scans to advocate for biometric rights and potentially influence the use of this technology.
Related
Why privacy is important, and having "nothing to hide" is irrelevant (2016)
Privacy is crucial for democracy, eroded by global surveillance. "Nothing to hide" argument debunked. Mass surveillance harms freedom, leads to self-censorship, and risks misuse. Protecting personal data is vital.
Airbnb's Hidden Camera Problem
Airbnb criticized for failing to protect guests from hidden cameras, revealed by CNN. Company faces numerous cases of unauthorized recordings, lacking swift action and transparency. Legal concerns raised over handling and resolution methods.
Selfie-based authentication raises eyebrows among infosec experts
Selfie-based authentication gains global momentum, Vietnam mandates face scans for transactions over $400. Concerns arise over leaked Singaporean selfies on the dark web. Experts note increased interest in selfie verification but highlight challenges in data protection and privacy laws. Organizations enhance security with liveness checks, biometric comparisons, and machine learning. Inclusivity and security balance remain crucial considerations.
Google testing facial recognition technology for security near Seattle
Google is testing facial recognition for security at its Seattle campus. Cameras compare faces to badges for unauthorized individuals. Privacy concerns arise amid past security issues. Other tech giants face similar scrutiny.
When Facial Recognition Helps Police Target Black Faces
Karl Ricanek, an AI engineer, reflects on facial recognition technology's moral implications. His work evolved from US Navy projects to commercial use, despite early awareness of biases. Real-world misidentifications stress the need for ethical considerations.
The whole idea of opting out is a scam. They are 100% planning to force mandatory facial recognition on the general public.
My husband's workplace tried to force him to enrol in biometrics along with the rest of his company. It was just for doing timesheets. We'd have fought it if it were for identity verification and security as well, but no, it was just for bloody timesheets. Giving away immutable biometric data to a crappy third party company who has data breaches every six months just for bloody timesheets just felt extraordinarily ridiculous and audacious. My husband did encourage his colleagues to consider not signing it but nobody gave it much thought (or was worried about being fired).
We recently needed to verify our identities to a financial institution and they pushed hard to use a (different) third party biometrics system instead of the good ol fashioned just not doing that. We needed to provide them with all the normal ID documentation anyway. Why the hell would we sign up for biometrics on top of that?
I suppose my point is that people generally choose the path of least resistance (understandably). Turning the tides on biometrics garbage being normalised, the default, and probably the only way in the future is something I can't really see happening.
He went overboard in terms of harassment and intimidation but he did not win. Fuck that guy.
Also who cares whether the photo is immediately deleted? The metrics are what matter and those are kept.
My issue is if any private company gets to use it or store it. I will never join Clear and I tell everyone I meet not to trust them.
I get to the front of the line, tell the lady "I'd like to opt out" - she looks at me like I was speaking Algonquin. So I repeat "I'd like to opt out". Her - "What are you talking about??". So I point to the sign sitting two feet away from her and say "your sign says the face scan is optional and I can opt out???"
"Just say you want a pat down, we don't know what you're saying".
To say their training on this being "optional" is lacking is quite the understatement... You have signs telling people what to tell the agent, verbatim, and the agent acts like they have no idea what you're talking about... speaking of big government at its finest...
They've won.
Isn't it just literally taking a photo, like any digital camera?
To me "scanning" implies a 3D point cloud. Apple's TrueDepth camera, with a projected dot cloud, that it uses for Face ID -- that's scanning, as opposed to just a photo.
Are airports actually performing 3D scans now?
Or are they still just normal digital cameras, but people are calling it "scanning" because they want it to sound scarier than "photos"?
- There is no longer the paper form you filled out on the plane/prior to customs. You fill out online forms (visa or ESTA in my case) months before you travel.
- Upon arrival customs and immigration took my fingerprints and photo. My passport and ESTA were in order and I have traveled to the US several times before (and well, I am a privileged ethnicity from western Europe), and the agent didn't do any questioning about purpose of travel, accommodation, etc this time. That has happened to me on previous trips though. This type of questioning always makes me feel uncomfortable and afraid to say something wrong, so that was a relief. I would certainly not begin to argue with the agent about opting out of the biometrics at this stage.
- My checked bags were not inspected by customs. On a previous US trip I did find a notice that the bag had been inspected.
- On departure, at the TSA bag check there were the full body scanners you step into and raise your hands. I didn't see any information about opting out anywhere, though I wasn't actively searching for it. There was nothing in particular that made me consider that my face was being scanned in detail here.
- At the gate I was surprised that boarding check was via facecam. This was the first time I have seen this and I had not considered that my pictures from before could be used this way. Everywhere else and all other times I have traveled you board with the barcode/QR on the boarding card and without any ID check.
So in my experience (as an admittedly privileged traveler) the system is optimized for efficiency and "convenience", but certainly not for privacy. There isn't much information to find about what you must do and what you are able to opt out of. Just do the same thing as the person in front of you in the line, ad infinitum. I know I should be more concerned about privacy in general, but the stress of travel and anxiety about doing something "wrong" and somehow getting in trouble with these agencies make me (and probably most others) accept these things.
I really can’t wait for tomorrow’s hackers using the next generation of Sora to make fake video of me doing god knows what [1] thanks to the CBP’s next data leak.
And I can’t opt out, because I’m an evil foreign national. Or rather I can; it just means giving up on travelling to or through the US.
[0]: https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2020-09/O...
[1]: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/04/asia/deepfake-cfo-scam-ho...
If a few educated people on hacker news opt out, it means nothing. The practice of invasive biometric scanning will be normalized by the masses who just comply. Just like with other existing security procedures. Soon the scans will be mandatory but also everywhere else in society. I’m not sure what a good defense is against this.
[1] https://www.ajl.org/campaigns/fly
[2] https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/factsheets/facial-recognition...
That said I do think it should be default opt-out.
A pat down is invasive, but the pat down is ephemeral by its own nature.
Just wait until the TSA announces they trained an AI model on sorted naked images.
The correct incantation is: "I would like to opt out of the millimeter wave."
If you do this, then someone of the same gender will run their gloved hands over (somewhat sensitive) areas of your body, then test the gloves for explosive residue.
At my age, I probably shouldn't care about any of this, but I don't like needless x-rays.
The government already has your picture, but letting them copy device data over is a much more significant invasion of privacy
Also kind of pointless too, because anyone with something actually important could just encrypt it, upload it somewhere, and wipe the device. Good luck putting the packets through customs
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/18/phone-d...
I’m also perplexed when my parent won’t give the State department their SSN, but received SSN benefits, and Medicare, and pays taxes to the IRS. They say they don’t want “the government” to have their data, but oddly think the government doesn’t already have a dossier on them.
I love the scans as they speed up security. I traveled recently, internationally to and from the US and it was nice to just scan my face and show my passport and not need to scan my qrcode boarding pass.
Related
Why privacy is important, and having "nothing to hide" is irrelevant (2016)
Privacy is crucial for democracy, eroded by global surveillance. "Nothing to hide" argument debunked. Mass surveillance harms freedom, leads to self-censorship, and risks misuse. Protecting personal data is vital.
Airbnb's Hidden Camera Problem
Airbnb criticized for failing to protect guests from hidden cameras, revealed by CNN. Company faces numerous cases of unauthorized recordings, lacking swift action and transparency. Legal concerns raised over handling and resolution methods.
Selfie-based authentication raises eyebrows among infosec experts
Selfie-based authentication gains global momentum, Vietnam mandates face scans for transactions over $400. Concerns arise over leaked Singaporean selfies on the dark web. Experts note increased interest in selfie verification but highlight challenges in data protection and privacy laws. Organizations enhance security with liveness checks, biometric comparisons, and machine learning. Inclusivity and security balance remain crucial considerations.
Google testing facial recognition technology for security near Seattle
Google is testing facial recognition for security at its Seattle campus. Cameras compare faces to badges for unauthorized individuals. Privacy concerns arise amid past security issues. Other tech giants face similar scrutiny.
When Facial Recognition Helps Police Target Black Faces
Karl Ricanek, an AI engineer, reflects on facial recognition technology's moral implications. His work evolved from US Navy projects to commercial use, despite early awareness of biases. Real-world misidentifications stress the need for ethical considerations.