6 ms·

I think people who find this concerning are very likely in the minorty. Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks. I app

by js2 9y ago

I think people who find this concerning are very likely in the minorty. Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks. I appreciate the security concerns of MSG, but I don't see how we can make an informed decision without knowing its false positive and false negative rates, and what happens on false positives. Then obviously there is the question of where they are acquiring the facial data from, and with whom they share it. Also, haven't casinos done this for years to keep out banned gamblers?

mynameisvlad 9y ago
> Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks. Wow, I hadn't heard about this and was genuinely surprised it's actually a thing. Fortunately, apparently it's opt-out: > Are all guests required to use Ticket Tag? > If you don't want to use Ticket Tag, you can simply carry and show a photo ID that matches the name identified with your ticket. From their Privacy Policy: https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/en_CA/faq/my-disney-experience/my-magic-plus-privacy/ https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/en_CA/faq/my-disney-experi...
- mtgx 9y ago
  I was surprised to learn Disney is doing this, too. It almost seems like a "Get their biometrics while they're young" type of indoctrination program. I also don't think 3 years will pass until their whole fingerprint database will be hacked (in a way we'd find out about, it may have already been hacked). It just seems like both a terrible as well as a completely unnecessary idea.
  - teej 9y ago
    Please spend the time to read the link before spreading FUD. “In order to use Ticket Tag, you simply place your finger on a reader. The system, which utilizes the technology of biometrics, takes an image of your finger, converts the image into a unique numerical value and immediately discards the image. The numerical value is recalled when you use Ticket Tag with the same ticket to re-enter or visit another Park. Ticket Tag does not store fingerprints.”
    - master-litty 9y ago
      That makes an outstanding difference, thank you for emphasizing that.
    - dmitrygr 9y ago
      BigInt picToNumber(pic){ BigInt x = 0; for (int r=0;r<pic.w;r++) for (int c=0;c<pic.h;c++) x = (x*265)+pic.pixel(r,c); return x; } Yup...converts to number.. Unless they specify HOW, that means nothing. Anything is a number to a computer.
      - tritium 9y ago
        Yeah, one terabyte is simply an absolutely gigantic octal value, with a trillion place settings. Perfect for storing a quantity of high resolution “unique numbers” which you might need to recall at some point, when you want to match them up with other oddly similar (but not precisely equal) high resolution unique numbers. I hear that you can convert images to “unique numbers” using a technique known as “lossless compression” but that stuff’s all way above my pay grade.
    - bluetwo 9y ago
      Unless it fails. Then the teenager operating it needs to call over a manager, who looks up your previous park entrances on an iPad to make sure it is the same person. So, they've got your fingerprint and video of your face. (Personal experience)
    - candiodari 9y ago
      So they store it in a way that they can compare any fingerprint they find/take an image of to your fingerprint ... That's SO reassuring. So nothing prevents them from taking the packages of their fries stand, get fingerprint images from them, figure out who it is, and send you an offer for 50% off the weight loss holiday package ? What exactly does privacy for fingerprints imply, except that people are not able to do exactly that ? And I don't mean that they won't. Privacy means they CAN'T. Not even if the next Disney CEO is Vladimir Putin.
- singingboyo 9y ago
  They also quite explicitly state it does not store the actual fingerprint, which might be (is? logic follows) notable. It 'converts to a numerical value' instead. That can't just be hashing (how do you check that when validating later? images won't be exact) but instead would be some form of parsing to a subset of data which is 'unique enough' for their purposes. Their purpose is something like identification across current visitors with statistical significance, preventing ticket sharing. I'd expect that that has the side effect of the data NOT being unique enough for other purposes where the ticket isn't present. I suspect this was inevitable given Disney's obsession with removing friction. It seems like they at least take the implications fairly seriously, which is nice to see.
  - crooked-v 9y ago
    Disney is one of the few companies I'd sorta-kinda trust with this sort of thing, given their extraordinary attention to detail and laser focus on long-term customer happiness with everything park-related and the attention to data security that would also imply.
    - diafygi 9y ago
      But that's not who you're trusting. The issue now is that any "business record" is available to be requested by law enforcement without a warrant. The case law around third party doctrine is a huge friction point in establishing corporate trust.
      - icebraining 9y ago
        It's useful to remember the words of the prescient Privacy Protection Study Commission, from 1977: "The real danger is the gradual erosion of individual liberties through the automation, integration, and interconnection of many small, separate recordkeeping systems, each of which alone may seem innocuous, even benevolent, and wholly justifiable."
  - mynameisvlad 9y ago
    > I suspect this was inevitable given Disney's obsession with removing friction. Yeah, I would say it's this 100%. Disney wants people to leave their wallets at their hotel. The RFID band they give you can be used for everything from entering your hotel room to getting into the park and your rides (including Fastpass) to even paying for things if you link a credit card. Obviously, it's easy to take the band off and give it to someone else, so they needed some other way to check if you're the person who originally used the ticket. Hashes based on fingerprints are unique enough to be the replacement to traditional IDs.
- chopin 9y ago
  They require a photo ID to visit their parks? This immediately would drop them from the places I wish to visit.
  - lathiat 9y ago
    Not if you give them your fingerprint instead! :) It's basically to stop reselling/re-using multi-day, annual passes, etc.
sbinthree 9y ago
These services are also quite successful among bars to alert them to "problem customers". Very fast growing market, unfortunately.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  I cobbled together a very rudimentary system for doing this in my driveway to spot people who check for unlocked cars to steal from. Right now it only does human detection, but facial recognition is possible as my time allows me to implement it.
larkeith 9y ago
> Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks. The critical difference here is that this is done with the consumer's knowledge and consent (as another user noted, you can opt out) - thankfully, we do not yet have the technology to fingerprint someone without them knowing. To me, the idea that my image and personal details, along with a history of payments and locations, might be stored in any public corporation's database without my awareness is terrifying - especially considering there's nothing preventing the sale or transfer of such data, and the security (or lack thereof) of many companies. While I'm undoubtedly in the minority here, I would be surprised if many people are unconcerned about unaccountable, silent large-scale surveillance by corporate entities.
- creep 9y ago
  What are you worried about, exactly? If there is some other reason besides that this data has the potential to be sold, I would like to know so I can be worried too. I live in one of the largest cities in Canada, which doesn't compare at all to New York. I've never been through an intensive security protocol (haven't even been to Disneyland, and our airport is just a matter of a simple metal detector) and this prospect doesn't really bother me. I would like to know about it when it's being done, but otherwise I believe that any data obtained from my person is ultimately inconsequential to the way I live my life. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the most anyone can do with such data at the moment is ad profiling, and I don't pay attention to ads. I don't really buy things. I am in control of my own actions, and to know that somebody has information on me doesn't change that. The goal is to be as authentic as possible. Is there a reason to care?
  - ABCLAW 9y ago
    >Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the most anyone can do with such data at the moment is ad profiling You're wrong. We already see systems in the wild that gather this data to make financial decisions regarding you (whether or not to extend credit, etc), to track you (particularly useful in litigation), to perform open-source investigations of you without your knowledge, to make decisions regarding your eligibility for various services and insurance, to determine your access to information, etc. Regulation of companies that collect personal information already exists, and already exists for well defined reasons. Since you're Canadian, feel free to look up PIPEDA and your local provincial equivalents. Largely, the substantive portions of the legislation are directly lifted from the following OECD report: http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesontheprotectionofprivacyandtransborderflowsofpersonaldata.htm http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesonthepro... In particular, look at Part Two, which is the basis for the overarching privacy framework in Canada: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-8.6/page-11.html#h-26 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-8.6/page-11.html#h...
rypskar 9y ago
>Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks In my opinion, the problem is not that folks are giving up fingerprints or that fingerprints is used for low security authentication. We all leave fingerprints every time we touch something. So the problem is trying to use fingerprints for high level security or assuming fingerprints are a secret

by js2 9y ago

mynameisvlad 9y ago

> Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks. Wow, I hadn't heard about this and was genuinely surprised it's actually a thing. Fortunately, apparently it's opt-out: > Are all guests required to use Ticket Tag? > If you don't want to use Ticket Tag, you can simply carry and show a photo ID that matches the name identified with your ticket. From their Privacy Policy: https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/en_CA/faq/my-disney-experience/my-magic-plus-privacy/ https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/en_CA/faq/my-disney-experi...

mtgx 9y ago
I was surprised to learn Disney is doing this, too. It almost seems like a "Get their biometrics while they're young" type of indoctrination program. I also don't think 3 years will pass until their whole fingerprint database will be hacked (in a way we'd find out about, it may have already been hacked). It just seems like both a terrible as well as a completely unnecessary idea.
- teej 9y ago
  Please spend the time to read the link before spreading FUD. “In order to use Ticket Tag, you simply place your finger on a reader. The system, which utilizes the technology of biometrics, takes an image of your finger, converts the image into a unique numerical value and immediately discards the image. The numerical value is recalled when you use Ticket Tag with the same ticket to re-enter or visit another Park. Ticket Tag does not store fingerprints.”
  - master-litty 9y ago
    That makes an outstanding difference, thank you for emphasizing that.
  - dmitrygr 9y ago
    BigInt picToNumber(pic){ BigInt x = 0; for (int r=0;r<pic.w;r++) for (int c=0;c<pic.h;c++) x = (x*265)+pic.pixel(r,c); return x; } Yup...converts to number.. Unless they specify HOW, that means nothing. Anything is a number to a computer.
    - tritium 9y ago
      Yeah, one terabyte is simply an absolutely gigantic octal value, with a trillion place settings. Perfect for storing a quantity of high resolution “unique numbers” which you might need to recall at some point, when you want to match them up with other oddly similar (but not precisely equal) high resolution unique numbers. I hear that you can convert images to “unique numbers” using a technique known as “lossless compression” but that stuff’s all way above my pay grade.
  - bluetwo 9y ago
    Unless it fails. Then the teenager operating it needs to call over a manager, who looks up your previous park entrances on an iPad to make sure it is the same person. So, they've got your fingerprint and video of your face. (Personal experience)
  - candiodari 9y ago
    So they store it in a way that they can compare any fingerprint they find/take an image of to your fingerprint ... That's SO reassuring. So nothing prevents them from taking the packages of their fries stand, get fingerprint images from them, figure out who it is, and send you an offer for 50% off the weight loss holiday package ? What exactly does privacy for fingerprints imply, except that people are not able to do exactly that ? And I don't mean that they won't. Privacy means they CAN'T. Not even if the next Disney CEO is Vladimir Putin.
singingboyo 9y ago
They also quite explicitly state it does not store the actual fingerprint, which might be (is? logic follows) notable. It 'converts to a numerical value' instead. That can't just be hashing (how do you check that when validating later? images won't be exact) but instead would be some form of parsing to a subset of data which is 'unique enough' for their purposes. Their purpose is something like identification across current visitors with statistical significance, preventing ticket sharing. I'd expect that that has the side effect of the data NOT being unique enough for other purposes where the ticket isn't present. I suspect this was inevitable given Disney's obsession with removing friction. It seems like they at least take the implications fairly seriously, which is nice to see.
- crooked-v 9y ago
  Disney is one of the few companies I'd sorta-kinda trust with this sort of thing, given their extraordinary attention to detail and laser focus on long-term customer happiness with everything park-related and the attention to data security that would also imply.
  - diafygi 9y ago
    But that's not who you're trusting. The issue now is that any "business record" is available to be requested by law enforcement without a warrant. The case law around third party doctrine is a huge friction point in establishing corporate trust.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      It's useful to remember the words of the prescient Privacy Protection Study Commission, from 1977: "The real danger is the gradual erosion of individual liberties through the automation, integration, and interconnection of many small, separate recordkeeping systems, each of which alone may seem innocuous, even benevolent, and wholly justifiable."
- mynameisvlad 9y ago
  > I suspect this was inevitable given Disney's obsession with removing friction. Yeah, I would say it's this 100%. Disney wants people to leave their wallets at their hotel. The RFID band they give you can be used for everything from entering your hotel room to getting into the park and your rides (including Fastpass) to even paying for things if you link a credit card. Obviously, it's easy to take the band off and give it to someone else, so they needed some other way to check if you're the person who originally used the ticket. Hashes based on fingerprints are unique enough to be the replacement to traditional IDs.
chopin 9y ago
They require a photo ID to visit their parks? This immediately would drop them from the places I wish to visit.
- lathiat 9y ago
  Not if you give them your fingerprint instead! :) It's basically to stop reselling/re-using multi-day, annual passes, etc.

sbinthree 9y ago

These services are also quite successful among bars to alert them to "problem customers". Very fast growing market, unfortunately.

Spooky23 9y ago
I cobbled together a very rudimentary system for doing this in my driveway to spot people who check for unlocked cars to steal from. Right now it only does human detection, but facial recognition is possible as my time allows me to implement it.

larkeith 9y ago

> Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks. The critical difference here is that this is done with the consumer's knowledge and consent (as another user noted, you can opt out) - thankfully, we do not yet have the technology to fingerprint someone without them knowing. To me, the idea that my image and personal details, along with a history of payments and locations, might be stored in any public corporation's database without my awareness is terrifying - especially considering there's nothing preventing the sale or transfer of such data, and the security (or lack thereof) of many companies. While I'm undoubtedly in the minority here, I would be surprised if many people are unconcerned about unaccountable, silent large-scale surveillance by corporate entities.

creep 9y ago
What are you worried about, exactly? If there is some other reason besides that this data has the potential to be sold, I would like to know so I can be worried too. I live in one of the largest cities in Canada, which doesn't compare at all to New York. I've never been through an intensive security protocol (haven't even been to Disneyland, and our airport is just a matter of a simple metal detector) and this prospect doesn't really bother me. I would like to know about it when it's being done, but otherwise I believe that any data obtained from my person is ultimately inconsequential to the way I live my life. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the most anyone can do with such data at the moment is ad profiling, and I don't pay attention to ads. I don't really buy things. I am in control of my own actions, and to know that somebody has information on me doesn't change that. The goal is to be as authentic as possible. Is there a reason to care?
- ABCLAW 9y ago
  >Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the most anyone can do with such data at the moment is ad profiling You're wrong. We already see systems in the wild that gather this data to make financial decisions regarding you (whether or not to extend credit, etc), to track you (particularly useful in litigation), to perform open-source investigations of you without your knowledge, to make decisions regarding your eligibility for various services and insurance, to determine your access to information, etc. Regulation of companies that collect personal information already exists, and already exists for well defined reasons. Since you're Canadian, feel free to look up PIPEDA and your local provincial equivalents. Largely, the substantive portions of the legislation are directly lifted from the following OECD report: http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesontheprotectionofprivacyandtransborderflowsofpersonaldata.htm http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesonthepro... In particular, look at Part Two, which is the basis for the overarching privacy framework in Canada: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-8.6/page-11.html#h-26 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-8.6/page-11.html#h...

rypskar 9y ago

>Folks are pretty willing to give up their fingerprint for access to Disney parks In my opinion, the problem is not that folks are giving up fingerprints or that fingerprints is used for low security authentication. We all leave fingerprints every time we touch something. So the problem is trying to use fingerprints for high level security or assuming fingerprints are a secret