Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

blog.kaspersky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 50 posts

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#41

Post by hartpuff »

wila wrote: post #20
peteretep wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the only purpose? Isn't it a little bit more likely that they want to check the same person is using the same passport?

Well, i don't believe they take the picture for your benefit. Actually also seen that a picture is also taken on exit. So yes there might be more reasons like making sure the biometrics match with what is stored in the rfid chip on the passport. But you can bet that the data is stored and will be mined when needed.

Heathrow and maybe other UK airports, but not all, whether you're entering or exiting, will take (two) photos, AIUI, in order to verify the correct person is boarding the aircraft.

Don't worry, they only keep your data for "as long as is necessary".

http://www.heathrow.com/departures/security-and-baggage/flyi...

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#42

Post by sukilot »

gcr wrote: post #28
rmoriz wrote: post #5

Besides this "regular" use-case there was recently a case when some former adult performer was doxxed using face recognition: http://fusion.net/story/295539/ntechlab-findface-facial-reco... Now, most of you probably don't care enough, only some are doing adult stuff. But let's imagine such a complete image/id database comes into hands of a bad regime. Most countries already collect and save biometric photos not even…

Fingerprints also have this issue. You only get ten of them that should last your entire life. With cooperation, we can build 'revocable biometrics' that mix faces and fingerprints with a password or PIN. To revoke your biometric, simply forget your PIN. The only thing you can do with these models is verify your claimed identity. They can't be used for search. So they're great for users, but not so great for evil est…

IOW, salt your meat.

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#44

Post by Namrog84 »

peteretep wrote: post #17
drdaeman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some (quite a lot of!) jurisdictions there are already laws that prohibit concealing ones' face. While the laws are against masks, it won't be a big stretch (esp. for a rogue regime with a plenty of corrupt judges at hand) to apply or extend such laws for this sort of make-up as well. All in the name of public safety, of course.

Japanese style health masks

That'll only delay the inevitable. Hair. Height. Walking patterns. Stride Length. Each added Criteria helps improve the odds. Oh this masked person waked out of building but they know of 28 people identified in building. So even without identifing your face they only need to build Confidence among a very small subset. Even if you go from building to city or country. They could likely narrow it to high confidence especially if they can actively ID the locations of all others with similar characteristics as you.

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#45

Post by entheon »

gcr wrote: post #28
rmoriz wrote: post #5

Besides this "regular" use-case there was recently a case when some former adult performer was doxxed using face recognition: http://fusion.net/story/295539/ntechlab-findface-facial-reco... Now, most of you probably don't care enough, only some are doing adult stuff. But let's imagine such a complete image/id database comes into hands of a bad regime. Most countries already collect and save biometric photos not even…

Fingerprints also have this issue. You only get ten of them that should last your entire life. With cooperation, we can build 'revocable biometrics' that mix faces and fingerprints with a password or PIN. To revoke your biometric, simply forget your PIN. The only thing you can do with these models is verify your claimed identity. They can't be used for search. So they're great for users, but not so great for evil est…

Uh, no thanks!

I'd like to avoid solutions that facilliate an implicit assent to the collection of biometric data.

The plan you've outlined still has large organizations building massive libraries of immutable identity data. (they'll still have the fingerprints, however mixed and matched and re-ordered, and they'll still have the scanned faces)

At the end of the day, we'd still be letting them, asking them, begging them to store our finger prints and recognize our faces. Putting bald data in the hands of amoral, faceless, collective entities like corporations and governments.

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#46

Post by rhizome »

rmoriz wrote: post #38
venomsnake wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can bribe someone to put fake data in the database next to your name.

This may look like an option, but once technology has a low failure rate, everything that doesn't match or that does seem unusual will trigger an alarm. Just watch the airport security checks after 9/11 when entering the US: Either you provide a biometric passport accept x-ray radiation or you will be personally annoyed… for your own safety, of course. I believe this is not because of any bad intention, however it tr…

It's going to be a long, long time before facial recognition has a low failure rate. It's hard enough with speech recognition.

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#47

Post by gcr »

entheon wrote: post #45
gcr wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fingerprints also have this issue. You only get ten of them that should last your entire life. With cooperation, we can build 'revocable biometrics' that mix faces and fingerprints with a password or PIN. To revoke your biometric, simply forget your PIN. The only thing you can do with these models is verify your claimed identity. They can't be used for search. So they're great for users, but not so great for evil est…

Uh, no thanks! I'd like to avoid solutions that facilliate an implicit assent to the collection of biometric data. The plan you've outlined still has large organizations building massive libraries of immutable identity data. (they'll still have the fingerprints, however mixed and matched and re-ordered, and they'll still have the scanned faces) At the end of the day, we'd still be letting them, asking them, begging t…

The work I'm thinking about (revocable biotokens) is a bit like a hash, so Facelesscorp never gets access to your raw biometric. The only thing Facelesscorp can see is an opaque blob that they can only use to verify a cooperative subject's identity; it's not useful for anything else.

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#48

Post by rmoriz »

rhizome wrote: post #46
rmoriz wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may look like an option, but once technology has a low failure rate, everything that doesn't match or that does seem unusual will trigger an alarm. Just watch the airport security checks after 9/11 when entering the US: Either you provide a biometric passport accept x-ray radiation or you will be personally annoyed… for your own safety, of course. I believe this is not because of any bad intention, however it tr…

It's going to be a long, long time before facial recognition has a low failure rate. It's hard enough with speech recognition.

Did you read the opening posting on VK.com? I guess it only takes 10-15 years. And in some situations, e.g. entrace checks, public transport etc. you've even right now a high chance to obtain great facial images because you (as in state, authority) are able to control the environment.

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#49

Post by peteretep »

wila wrote: post #20
peteretep wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the only purpose? Isn't it a little bit more likely that they want to check the same person is using the same passport?

Well, i don't believe they take the picture for your benefit. Actually also seen that a picture is also taken on exit. So yes there might be more reasons like making sure the biometrics match with what is stored in the rfid chip on the passport. But you can bet that the data is stored and will be mined when needed.

    > Well, i don't believe they take the picture for your
    > benefit
Why would anyone believe that?

Re: You can’t replace your face, says face recognition

#50

Post by rhizome »

rmoriz wrote: post #48
rhizome wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's going to be a long, long time before facial recognition has a low failure rate. It's hard enough with speech recognition.

Did you read the opening posting on VK.com? I guess it only takes 10-15 years. And in some situations, e.g. entrace checks, public transport etc. you've even right now a high chance to obtain great facial images because you (as in state, authority) are able to control the environment.

From the article, they only get 90% accuracy in controlled conditions, and much, much worse when comparing images taken in the wild. In voice recognition, perhaps a smaller problem space, 90% accuracy means everything gets proofread by a human. "10-15 years" is not an estimate, it's a carrot on a stick.

I can imagine that at some point, some level of accuracy will be deemed "accurate," after which we'll still see mistakes. That will be too bad in the eventuality that this technology is used to help justify a killing.

Post reply on HN