41–50 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you don't want new data points on your face in a database.
Not sure if this happens in smaller airports, but if the passport scanner is automated, they already take a picture of you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going against implicit expectations of others and being the only one who does something is maybe the hardest thing humans can do. Opting out could risk holding up the boarding process, possibly missing the flight, unpleasant treatment by security and being pitted against the other passengers - all of it to opt out of something is clearly a dark pattern. All of this is very well understood by the people who designed t…
I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not certain of the particular setup here (per airport thing) but I’ve never had them scan my passport at the gate in a US Airport, only at Immigration checkpoints for international travel and TSA. This is especially true for domestic travel as well.
But were you facially scanned?
At TSA, They scan the first page of passport (or local ID) and usually Full body scan. So in the strict sense of facially scanned no.
At the gate (until now), neither. They would scan the boarding pass and eyeball the passport if international.
Again the point here is that in the first two instances these are Government agencies doing the scanning. At the third, the Government no longer has anything to do with it.
The question with this stuff is how and where are Airlines (private companies) getting a database of biometric data and what are they doing with it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed about the clickbaity title, but what they were trying to imply is still true. Here's an example of Jake Williams attempting to opt-out of Delta facial scanning and immediately being scrutinized for it: https://twitter.com/MalwareJake/status/1144789516684877824
He says there that the US is one of the few countries which doesn't do exit checks for immigration. Is that true? I hadn't thought about this. I know the Schengen zone does, as well as China and much of Latin America, but in my experience the UK doesn't. Does Australia/New Zealand/Canada (my feeling is that Australia doesn't)? What about Asian and African countries?
[0] they call it a "smartgate", presumably because it sounds less invasive than "biometric checkpoint", see https://www.abf.gov.au/entering-and-leaving-australia/smartg...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon.
Probably that's because I didn't travel to USA yet, but I don't understand why it's sad. Why the hell would you opt for a patdown? What must be the default then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon.
Probably that's because I didn't travel to USA yet, but I don't understand why it's sad. Why the hell would you opt for a patdown? What must be the default then?
Body scanners.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, what you're saying is... there's no problem because people have already given up anyway? At the very least opting out gives them a data point that their theatric procedures aren't readily accepted by everybody.
There's no 'given up'. There was no privacy to begin with. I don't see why crossing borders should be anonymous, as long as borders exist. Internal flight could be anonymous, but when is the last time anyone paid for flights by cash?
Let me tell you about flying before 1996, kid. It was great. No ID presented, you just needed a paper ticket. You could actually buy and sell paper tickets on usenet (and people did), and you could wave to your family when you get on the airplane as you didn't need a ticket to be in the boarding area. I thought it was a disaster when they started implementing the dystopia we have today, and remember premonitions of disaster listening to some douchbag I brought to the airport babbling about the government "keeping us safe."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably that's because I didn't travel to USA yet, but I don't understand why it's sad. Why the hell would you opt for a patdown? What must be the default then?
These: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use the ‘smart’ gates at Melbourne regularly. You insert your passport, stand in front of a camera, and one assumes that your current photograph is compared to that of your passport. If they’re the same, you pass. I fail to see the privacy implications. I’m already giving someone my passport details – I must do that to enter or exit the country. That passport already contains my photograph. What privacy am I losing…
This may be true but the end game for governments is to have facial recognition everywhere. They start at the airport because "it doesn't matter, you are already giving your info out" and then we become OK with the idea so they start rolling it out for public transport and "it doesn't matter, you already do this every time you fly" It seems to me that the only way to resist is to take a very hard rejection of facial…
Realistically the only way to resist is to develop an informed, engaged populace. There's a huge gulf between "facial recognition for crossing international borders" and "facial recognition for getting on the subway" - the former is obviously beneficial and the latter is obviously a massive overreach.
The idea that one will inevitably follow the other is only really plausible because of the public's apathy, and it leads to situations where we throw the baby out with the bathwater.