22 ms·

TSA announces “biometrics vision for all commercial aviation travelers”

166 points by jtc331 8y ago

ryandrake 8y ago
I love how their "stakeholder" list [1] doesn't include travelers. Just government and air travel industry. This speaks volumes to their mentality. 1: https://papersplease.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/biometrics-stakeholders.png https://papersplease.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/biome...
bonestamp2 8y ago
I'd bet Amazon is powering the facial recognition.
- josephpmay 8y ago
  They're not
  - bonestamp2 8y ago
    Source?
    - josephpmay 8y ago
      This is the tech they're using https://www.vision-box.com/solutions/travel-and-border-control/airports-and-airlines https://www.vision-box.com/solutions/travel-and-border-contr...
clubm8 8y ago
TSA can "envision" all it wants, it must operate within the confines of the constitution. CBP gets away with a lot due to the unique legal quagmire that is the US border. TSA has no such luxury, and thus (with a little help with orgs like ACLU and EFF) such initiatives should fail. Some restrictions apply - void where prohibited[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception
- mbreese 8y ago
  Air travel is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. TSA gets a lot of leeway because of this.
  - aesh2Xa1 8y ago
    What's the argument here? Spaghetti and meatballs aren't explicitly guaranteed, either, but you can eat them without signing away any other rights.
    - beambot 8y ago
      s/spaghetti & meatballs/illicit drugs/ and that argument falls apart. You will quickly lose other rights, even though drugs aren't explicitly guaranteed or prohibited by the constitution either. (Not addressing GPs argument, just that the spaghetti & meatballs one doesn't hold water.)
      - samstave 8y ago
        Bone Saws aren't banned either, and retinal eye-scans of assassins will not make the world a safer place. Having Humanist-Centric politics makes the world a better place. Humans with shitty governments, parenting and environments which are shitty typically wind up being shitty humans. Building walls, guns, bombs, cages, cops, totalitarian and authoritarian regimes are no substitute for actually working to be better humans
        afjl 8y ago
        I agree but you can't realistically build policy around "working to be better humans". Walls, guns, surveillance, etc are all easily deployable policies with easily measurable results. I don't enjoy the surveillance state or waiting 2 hours for airport security but it is tolerable...to an extent.
    - labster 8y ago
      Tell that to the residents of Old Smoky, who lost their poor meatballs to government regulation.
stochastic_monk 8y ago
The link appears to be down. This cached version [0] should help. [0] http://archive.is/B88Ce http://archive.is/B88Ce
samstave 8y ago
On a serious note; One has already provided their personal details to purchase the ticket, then to receive their bording pass, then presenting their ID to pass through securit - and soon, to provide their "realID" BS which requires a bunch more hoops-to-jump-through-to-obtain, and now in addition to all of this, WHAT exactly is facial recognition/retinal scanning going to do? I would argue that if they are going to use facial recognition/retinal scanning - then I shouldnt be stopped, searched or require ANY paper document to do anything and should be able to just walk through access-portals for which my ID can be tied to my ticket-of-passage....
- jothezero 8y ago
  Sounds about right, at least it is setting the path towards it
- rbetts 8y ago
  That's the argument - you are already required to show photo id and have a person compare your photo to your face. This replaces that person with an algorithm.
  - xyz0 8y ago
    But that person isn't attached to databases containing archived CCTV, scraped social media data [1], parking tickets, license plate reader data [2], phone metadata, or the myriad biased and unaccountable algorithms created by private companies, used to rank and sort humans [3]. Think about the implications for whistleblowers, journalists meeting anonymous sources, activists, immigrants, etc etc etc. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/nsa-collecting-millions-of-faces-from-web-images.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/nsa-collecting-million... [2] https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/location-tracking/you-are-being-tracked https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/location-trac... [3] https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessm...
- josephpmay 8y ago
  That is literally what they're trying to do.
usaphp 8y ago
I remember how everyone in USA made fun of China’s facial recognition/social rating system. I wonder if something similar will be implemented soon in USA too.
- maze-le 8y ago
  It just one major assault away... In europe too for that matter.
adictator 8y ago
It's 2018 & the terrorists are still winning!
eanzenberg 8y ago
Good! I for one am glad for this and the measures that were implemented as a result of certain actors wishing ill on our society. It’s a small price to pay for piece of mind when flying. For the past 17 years there was immense fear-mongering of what kind of slippery slope these measures would lead to and yet none have really materialized.
- Aeolun 8y ago
  Aside from all the stories about minorities, and sometimes even white males being harrassed and physically violated, but yeah, those are just minor details.
  - eanzenberg 8y ago
    Eh, when did this become identity politics?
- agorabinary 8y ago
  None have materialized except.. for biometrics on all passengers.. the very subject of this article.. ? Downvoted.
- sailfast 8y ago
  I could not disagree more. Trading liberty for safety is not something we should ever do. Risk mitigation is different than giving up rights. They can be done at the same time without compromising anything. “No slippery slope...yet” isn’t really a thing you want to rely on. I am personally furious every time I fly because these rules do little to protect us. I’m glad it is giving someone (you?) some peace I guess, but the cost is too much to bear. Outside of rights, do you have any idea how much this costs taxpayers and how insanely run that organization is? I’d say it fails many, many rational tests.
  - refurb 8y ago
    I could not disagree more. Trading liberty for safety is not something we should ever do. What is your stance on field sobriety testing? That’s a pretty clear example of trading liberty for safety.
sverhagen 8y ago
I'm very conflicted about this. And I'm actually sitting at my gate while typing this, in an uncharacteristically busy terminal, where I'm suddenly so very urgently aware about the risks of large crowds at airports and such. Conflicted because it does make sense to me that tracking people in facilities like this could help with safety and security. I have no principled problem with my picture being taken. But I wouldn't want it to be abused, for sure. So... is it the secondary uses, like marketing and totalitarian uses (never thought that'd go in one sentence) that I'm worried about? Or should I be worried about it anyway? Does the distinction matter? Is distinguishing between the two possible? Realistic? ... CONFUSED!
- keiferski 8y ago
  There are large crowds of people in every city on planet Earth. Do you want a security check to be required to be out in public?
  - sverhagen 8y ago
    Airlines have traditionally been targets for terrorism. For other concentrations of people like pop concerts the same may apply. Or in any case, those already have had security measures for a while beyond just some town's busy downtown. But I don't know what I want. I'm probably mostly saying that it's not a black or white matter for me.
    - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
      > Airlines have traditionally been targets for terrorism. Orders of magnitude more terrorist attacks are targeted at crowds of people "out in the open" in cities than at airlines.
poulsbohemian 8y ago
> In the future, TSA will be able to use TSA Pre® enrolled facial images for matching…. Moving forward, TSA Pre® will increase its access to and utilization of voluntarily-provided biometric data, including facial images, to modernize the trusted traveler experience for TSA Pre® travelers. Wait wait, so let's use biometrics on people we already trust! I mean, not that TSA Pre-check is hard to get (airlines include it free for their best travelers after all) but give me a break government - you've already said these people are a-ok, so there's no point in this silliness.
- komali2 8y ago
  Holy shit my partner and I were so close to pulling the trigger on precheck before this news came out. Very glad we didn't. How does this work in terms of consent? Was there some tiny line of text I didn't see that allows TSA to go through with this?
  - poulsbohemian 8y ago
    Actually, unless I'm missing something, what they are saying here comes in two parts: 1) You now have to include a photo, same as you would for a passport. 2) They will have photo lines for TSA where they recognize you from these photos, nominally to help make the lines faster. So on one hand... you already have to provide a photo for a passport, so this is just bringing TSA Pre-Check into balance with that. But, on the other... could government waste anymore of my tax dollars? I mean - they already "trust" the people who receive pre-check AND the lines are never that long. So it's just more silliness.
- pishpash 8y ago
  But they need to know you are you ... to know you are trusted.
- pdonis 8y ago
  > let's use biometrics on people we already trust! The biometrics would eventually replace the ID check you have to go through now. People who are "trusted" don't get to just walk to their airplane today.
dguido 8y ago
At least they are not using the blockchain. :-x
bigiain 8y ago
I wonder what the GDPR implications of using this on international travellers from europe are? What data are they collecting? What are they using to for? Who do they share it with? How can I request a copy of all my personal data? What's the process by which I notify them of errors in my data, and how quickly will they correct them? How do I request that they delete all my data?
- joering2 8y ago
  TSA is a government agency; GDPR doesnt apply.
  - Jaruzel 8y ago
    Incorrect. The TSA is a US based [government] agency; GDPR doesn't apply. In Europe, even governments are subject to the rules of GDPR.
- teeray 8y ago
  I seriously doubt a part of the US Gov't would be made subject to GDPR in any way. That would seem to be treaty territory. US Corps that do business in Europe are another matter entirely.
- benjiweber 8y ago
  US already gathers photos and fingerprints of visitors from Europe.
njarboe 8y ago
If the TSA and its $85 for a five year TSA Pre pass make you upset (like it does me), then you should really check out the private security pass system call CLEAR[1] for the next level of crazy. $179 a year, lines even faster than TSA Pre, already in 35 airports and starting to make a big push into stadium events. "Our advanced technology is SAFETY Act Certified from the Department of Homeland Security." WTF? [1]https://www.clearme.com https://www.clearme.com
- woodruffw 8y ago
  I dislike the TSA immensely, but paying a private company for an express line through security screams misaligned incentives to me (even if the vast majority of airport security is theater anyways).
- ubernostrum 8y ago
  CLEAR is not Pre. CLEAR is "skip waiting in line for a person to look at your ID and boarding pass". That's it. CLEAR by itself still sends you into the unpack-your-bag, take-off-half-your-clothes, body-scanner experience. If you want to leave things in your carry-on, stay fully dressed and use the metal detector, you still need Pre (or another program which grants membership in Pre). CLEAR does not give you Pre.
  - grompf 8y ago
    As someone who has CLEAR, and flys frequently on airlines that are not enrolled in Pre (JAL out of SFO), this is simply untrue. CLEAR escorts me to the front of the Pre line, allowing me to keep my shoes on and laptop in bag -- even though the airline is not a part of the Pre program.
    - ubernostrum 8y ago
      The international terminal at SFO often has dogs patrolling along the line; when they do that, everyone gets the Pre-style experience. CLEAR does not provide Pre. You can read their own documentation on that; they only get you past the podium.
josephpmay 8y ago
The amount of misinformation and fear mongering here is staggering. The article is posted by an anti-surveillance publication, so I guess the skewed perspective makes sense. I understand and agree with the fear of it being a slippery slope. I'm concerned about facial recognition becoming a regular part of surveillance in everyday life, and I hope that there is legislation around this TSA rollout that strictly prohibits their database from being used for non-airport related purposes. Here's how the system is designed to work at full implementation. This is based on a briefing I had about 6 months ago, so I imagine it's still along the lines of what they're planning. You get to airport security with your cary-on. You walk up to a kiosk to scan your face. When you booked your flight, they essentially did a background check on you, and if it was clean you just walk through to the terminal, with minimally-invasive scanning that doesn't require any stopping or removing anything from your bag. If something did come up on your background check (mainly a conviction for a violent crime or a pattern of information that suggests possible ties to terrorism... one of the TSA's goals behind this system is do screening based on suspicious activity rather than profiling) you go through what essentially is the TSA experience today.
- sdrothrock 8y ago
  > You get to airport security with your cary-on. You walk up to a kiosk to scan your face. When you booked your flight, they essentially did a background check on you, and if it was clean you just walk through to the terminal, with minimally-invasive scanning that doesn't require any stopping or removing anything from your bag. That's a pretty attractive sales proposition there; it's really hard for me as an individual to argue against the reduced hassle (and essentially a return to pre-2001 boarding patterns) in return for them having access to data they can realistically already get. Japan takes pictures and fingerprints from people as they arrive; this doesn't seem too much different, just the direction. I wonder if this could also be expanded to people without boarding passes. I know a lot of people mourn the loss of the ability to go directly to the gate to meet or see off family.
  - camillomiller 8y ago
    They take pictures and fingerprints of foreigners when you arrive in the USA as well. I hope no families at the gates will be allowed. People are already clueless about how to properly cue and board a plane. As a frequent flyer it is beyond irritating. Families or friends at the gate would just make things even worse. Plus, letting them in without a boarding pass is just a way to add insecurity variables to the airport experience for no reason but the movie-like romantic idea of airport goodbyes.
marcus_holmes 8y ago
meh. I flew into Thailand yesterday. They took my photo. Cambodia took my photo and my fingerprints. Nepal took my photo. The UK took my photo and compared it to the one encoded in my UK passport. As did Australia (with my Aussie passport). I know "America = Freedom", but pretty soon it's going to be the same situation as we have with gmail - you may not use gmail because you don't want Google hoovering your conversation to target ads with, but if anyone cc'd in the chain uses gmail, google gets it anyway. Whatever country you traveled to or from is going to get your biometrics, and they're probably sharing that info with the US anyway. I get the point of protesting this, but it feels kinda academic now. I'm not saying I like giving up my freedom for convenience, but I am fed up of standing for hours in lines for "security" checks that are just theater, when they've got the information from other sources anyway. The automated checks using the biometric information in my passport(s) feel so much quicker and less biased (e.g. Thai immigration officer getting into a long conversation with a Chinese tourist about what hotel they were staying at).
- opportune 8y ago
  It only feels academic because not enough people care. But it's not set in stone that people won't care. Sadly, it may take very major data privacy or biometric abuse for there to ever be action.
gumby 8y ago
What problem is being solved here? I didn’t see any explanation.
- caconym_ 8y ago
  The problem of how to gradually implement a pervasive surveillance state without at any one time arousing people's suspicions to the point where they will actually do something meaningful about it? Seriously, though, I would love to know the actual motivation for this. Somehow these days I have trouble attributing changes like this to simple bureaucratic momentum.
cm2187 8y ago
What I don't understand is why? Is it in response to an increase in plane hijackings in the US since 9/11? Unless the terrorists board with machine guns, 9/11 wouldn't be possible today. No passenger would assume that a bunch of middle eastern hijackers have any other intention than to kill them all, and it would be impossible for the hijackers to control the passengers.
- tehwebguy 8y ago
  Unless attackers bring a circular saw and an extension cord to cut open the cockpit door they can bring a damn bomb if they want. No one is going to give up the plans and turn their bomb into a missile ever again.
crististm 8y ago
I've always wondered what is the process that generates this kind of proposals. Was it a single person? A group conspiring from within to perpetuate the power of the TSA? Or from outside, influencing or enforcing the directors to take some actions? How do they come to be? And what strategy do they use to bootstrap the authority and support of the project? Puss in Boots always comes to my mind.
thecopy 8y ago
TSA and airport security-theatre in the USA is such a mind-boggling concept to me. Im flying a lot within Europe, especially between Sweden and Switzerland, and i have never had to show my passport to anyone. More often than not they don't check the fluids in my carry-on, and i get to keep my shoes on. The security check usually takes 5-10 minutes including the time spent queuing.
- CalRobert 8y ago
  Huh, have you flown Ryanair? I think they demand a passport from everyone.
  - jaclaz 8y ago
    In Europe (Schengen) you need not a passport (in the sense of a document valid for crossing a border) but you still need an ID card (all countries in Europe have these AFAIK) when boarding a plane. There was a lot of fuzz here in Italy some ten years ago about Ryan Air not accepting as ID some particular forms of ID cards because of some fine interpretation of the Law. In Italy a number of documents (driving license, boat driving license, other kinds of government issued ID cards, such as police ID cards, gun carrying permit, or similar) are considered as substituting the national ID card for the identification of someone, but for taking a plane only the national ID card (or a passport) is considered valid.
    - thecopy 8y ago
      I never shown my ID to anyone when flying between ZRH and ARN. When flying from Nice I had to present it though, but they barely looked, and just waved me through.
    - CalRobert 8y ago
      I know you can fly without a passport within Schengen, I just meant that Ryanair appear to unilaterally require one even within Schengen.
      - 8y ago
crististm 8y ago
In a way, they are forced to do this by their nature. As an abstract entity they should not and will not care about consequences other than making their job easier. But it operates in a world where other entities might come in play and counter. The problem is that I don't hear the voices of these other entities. Is TSA that powerful on its own?

166 points by jtc331 8y ago

I love how their "stakeholder" list [1] doesn't include travelers. Just government and air travel industry. This speaks volumes to their mentality. 1: https://papersplease.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/biometrics-stakeholders.png https://papersplease.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/biome...

bonestamp2 8y ago

I'd bet Amazon is powering the facial recognition.

josephpmay 8y ago
They're not
- bonestamp2 8y ago
  Source?
  - josephpmay 8y ago
    This is the tech they're using https://www.vision-box.com/solutions/travel-and-border-control/airports-and-airlines https://www.vision-box.com/solutions/travel-and-border-contr...

clubm8 8y ago

TSA can "envision" all it wants, it must operate within the confines of the constitution. CBP gets away with a lot due to the unique legal quagmire that is the US border. TSA has no such luxury, and thus (with a little help with orgs like ACLU and EFF) such initiatives should fail. Some restrictions apply - void where prohibited[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

mbreese 8y ago
Air travel is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. TSA gets a lot of leeway because of this.
- aesh2Xa1 8y ago
  What's the argument here? Spaghetti and meatballs aren't explicitly guaranteed, either, but you can eat them without signing away any other rights.
  - beambot 8y ago
    s/spaghetti & meatballs/illicit drugs/ and that argument falls apart. You will quickly lose other rights, even though drugs aren't explicitly guaranteed or prohibited by the constitution either. (Not addressing GPs argument, just that the spaghetti & meatballs one doesn't hold water.)
    - samstave 8y ago
      Bone Saws aren't banned either, and retinal eye-scans of assassins will not make the world a safer place. Having Humanist-Centric politics makes the world a better place. Humans with shitty governments, parenting and environments which are shitty typically wind up being shitty humans. Building walls, guns, bombs, cages, cops, totalitarian and authoritarian regimes are no substitute for actually working to be better humans
      - afjl 8y ago
        I agree but you can't realistically build policy around "working to be better humans". Walls, guns, surveillance, etc are all easily deployable policies with easily measurable results. I don't enjoy the surveillance state or waiting 2 hours for airport security but it is tolerable...to an extent.
  - labster 8y ago
    Tell that to the residents of Old Smoky, who lost their poor meatballs to government regulation.

stochastic_monk 8y ago

The link appears to be down. This cached version [0] should help. [0] http://archive.is/B88Ce http://archive.is/B88Ce

samstave 8y ago

On a serious note; One has already provided their personal details to purchase the ticket, then to receive their bording pass, then presenting their ID to pass through securit - and soon, to provide their "realID" BS which requires a bunch more hoops-to-jump-through-to-obtain, and now in addition to all of this, WHAT exactly is facial recognition/retinal scanning going to do? I would argue that if they are going to use facial recognition/retinal scanning - then I shouldnt be stopped, searched or require ANY paper document to do anything and should be able to just walk through access-portals for which my ID can be tied to my ticket-of-passage....

jothezero 8y ago
Sounds about right, at least it is setting the path towards it
rbetts 8y ago
That's the argument - you are already required to show photo id and have a person compare your photo to your face. This replaces that person with an algorithm.
- xyz0 8y ago
  But that person isn't attached to databases containing archived CCTV, scraped social media data [1], parking tickets, license plate reader data [2], phone metadata, or the myriad biased and unaccountable algorithms created by private companies, used to rank and sort humans [3]. Think about the implications for whistleblowers, journalists meeting anonymous sources, activists, immigrants, etc etc etc. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/nsa-collecting-millions-of-faces-from-web-images.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/nsa-collecting-million... [2] https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/location-tracking/you-are-being-tracked https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/location-trac... [3] https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessm...
josephpmay 8y ago
That is literally what they're trying to do.

usaphp 8y ago

I remember how everyone in USA made fun of China’s facial recognition/social rating system. I wonder if something similar will be implemented soon in USA too.

maze-le 8y ago
It just one major assault away... In europe too for that matter.

adictator 8y ago

It's 2018 & the terrorists are still winning!

eanzenberg 8y ago

Good! I for one am glad for this and the measures that were implemented as a result of certain actors wishing ill on our society. It’s a small price to pay for piece of mind when flying. For the past 17 years there was immense fear-mongering of what kind of slippery slope these measures would lead to and yet none have really materialized.

Aeolun 8y ago
Aside from all the stories about minorities, and sometimes even white males being harrassed and physically violated, but yeah, those are just minor details.
- eanzenberg 8y ago
  Eh, when did this become identity politics?
agorabinary 8y ago
None have materialized except.. for biometrics on all passengers.. the very subject of this article.. ? Downvoted.
sailfast 8y ago
I could not disagree more. Trading liberty for safety is not something we should ever do. Risk mitigation is different than giving up rights. They can be done at the same time without compromising anything. “No slippery slope...yet” isn’t really a thing you want to rely on. I am personally furious every time I fly because these rules do little to protect us. I’m glad it is giving someone (you?) some peace I guess, but the cost is too much to bear. Outside of rights, do you have any idea how much this costs taxpayers and how insanely run that organization is? I’d say it fails many, many rational tests.
- refurb 8y ago
  I could not disagree more. Trading liberty for safety is not something we should ever do. What is your stance on field sobriety testing? That’s a pretty clear example of trading liberty for safety.

sverhagen 8y ago

I'm very conflicted about this. And I'm actually sitting at my gate while typing this, in an uncharacteristically busy terminal, where I'm suddenly so very urgently aware about the risks of large crowds at airports and such. Conflicted because it does make sense to me that tracking people in facilities like this could help with safety and security. I have no principled problem with my picture being taken. But I wouldn't want it to be abused, for sure. So... is it the secondary uses, like marketing and totalitarian uses (never thought that'd go in one sentence) that I'm worried about? Or should I be worried about it anyway? Does the distinction matter? Is distinguishing between the two possible? Realistic? ... CONFUSED!

keiferski 8y ago
There are large crowds of people in every city on planet Earth. Do you want a security check to be required to be out in public?
- sverhagen 8y ago
  Airlines have traditionally been targets for terrorism. For other concentrations of people like pop concerts the same may apply. Or in any case, those already have had security measures for a while beyond just some town's busy downtown. But I don't know what I want. I'm probably mostly saying that it's not a black or white matter for me.
  - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
    > Airlines have traditionally been targets for terrorism. Orders of magnitude more terrorist attacks are targeted at crowds of people "out in the open" in cities than at airlines.

poulsbohemian 8y ago

> In the future, TSA will be able to use TSA Pre® enrolled facial images for matching…. Moving forward, TSA Pre® will increase its access to and utilization of voluntarily-provided biometric data, including facial images, to modernize the trusted traveler experience for TSA Pre® travelers. Wait wait, so let's use biometrics on people we already trust! I mean, not that TSA Pre-check is hard to get (airlines include it free for their best travelers after all) but give me a break government - you've already said these people are a-ok, so there's no point in this silliness.

komali2 8y ago
Holy shit my partner and I were so close to pulling the trigger on precheck before this news came out. Very glad we didn't. How does this work in terms of consent? Was there some tiny line of text I didn't see that allows TSA to go through with this?
- poulsbohemian 8y ago
  Actually, unless I'm missing something, what they are saying here comes in two parts: 1) You now have to include a photo, same as you would for a passport. 2) They will have photo lines for TSA where they recognize you from these photos, nominally to help make the lines faster. So on one hand... you already have to provide a photo for a passport, so this is just bringing TSA Pre-Check into balance with that. But, on the other... could government waste anymore of my tax dollars? I mean - they already "trust" the people who receive pre-check AND the lines are never that long. So it's just more silliness.
pishpash 8y ago
But they need to know you are you ... to know you are trusted.
pdonis 8y ago
> let's use biometrics on people we already trust! The biometrics would eventually replace the ID check you have to go through now. People who are "trusted" don't get to just walk to their airplane today.

dguido 8y ago

At least they are not using the blockchain. :-x

bigiain 8y ago

I wonder what the GDPR implications of using this on international travellers from europe are? What data are they collecting? What are they using to for? Who do they share it with? How can I request a copy of all my personal data? What's the process by which I notify them of errors in my data, and how quickly will they correct them? How do I request that they delete all my data?

joering2 8y ago
TSA is a government agency; GDPR doesnt apply.
- Jaruzel 8y ago
  Incorrect. The TSA is a US based [government] agency; GDPR doesn't apply. In Europe, even governments are subject to the rules of GDPR.
teeray 8y ago
I seriously doubt a part of the US Gov't would be made subject to GDPR in any way. That would seem to be treaty territory. US Corps that do business in Europe are another matter entirely.
benjiweber 8y ago
US already gathers photos and fingerprints of visitors from Europe.

njarboe 8y ago

If the TSA and its $85 for a five year TSA Pre pass make you upset (like it does me), then you should really check out the private security pass system call CLEAR[1] for the next level of crazy. $179 a year, lines even faster than TSA Pre, already in 35 airports and starting to make a big push into stadium events. "Our advanced technology is SAFETY Act Certified from the Department of Homeland Security." WTF? [1]https://www.clearme.com https://www.clearme.com

woodruffw 8y ago
I dislike the TSA immensely, but paying a private company for an express line through security screams misaligned incentives to me (even if the vast majority of airport security is theater anyways).
ubernostrum 8y ago
CLEAR is not Pre. CLEAR is "skip waiting in line for a person to look at your ID and boarding pass". That's it. CLEAR by itself still sends you into the unpack-your-bag, take-off-half-your-clothes, body-scanner experience. If you want to leave things in your carry-on, stay fully dressed and use the metal detector, you still need Pre (or another program which grants membership in Pre). CLEAR does not give you Pre.
- grompf 8y ago
  As someone who has CLEAR, and flys frequently on airlines that are not enrolled in Pre (JAL out of SFO), this is simply untrue. CLEAR escorts me to the front of the Pre line, allowing me to keep my shoes on and laptop in bag -- even though the airline is not a part of the Pre program.
  - ubernostrum 8y ago
    The international terminal at SFO often has dogs patrolling along the line; when they do that, everyone gets the Pre-style experience. CLEAR does not provide Pre. You can read their own documentation on that; they only get you past the podium.

josephpmay 8y ago

The amount of misinformation and fear mongering here is staggering. The article is posted by an anti-surveillance publication, so I guess the skewed perspective makes sense. I understand and agree with the fear of it being a slippery slope. I'm concerned about facial recognition becoming a regular part of surveillance in everyday life, and I hope that there is legislation around this TSA rollout that strictly prohibits their database from being used for non-airport related purposes. Here's how the system is designed to work at full implementation. This is based on a briefing I had about 6 months ago, so I imagine it's still along the lines of what they're planning. You get to airport security with your cary-on. You walk up to a kiosk to scan your face. When you booked your flight, they essentially did a background check on you, and if it was clean you just walk through to the terminal, with minimally-invasive scanning that doesn't require any stopping or removing anything from your bag. If something did come up on your background check (mainly a conviction for a violent crime or a pattern of information that suggests possible ties to terrorism... one of the TSA's goals behind this system is do screening based on suspicious activity rather than profiling) you go through what essentially is the TSA experience today.

sdrothrock 8y ago
> You get to airport security with your cary-on. You walk up to a kiosk to scan your face. When you booked your flight, they essentially did a background check on you, and if it was clean you just walk through to the terminal, with minimally-invasive scanning that doesn't require any stopping or removing anything from your bag. That's a pretty attractive sales proposition there; it's really hard for me as an individual to argue against the reduced hassle (and essentially a return to pre-2001 boarding patterns) in return for them having access to data they can realistically already get. Japan takes pictures and fingerprints from people as they arrive; this doesn't seem too much different, just the direction. I wonder if this could also be expanded to people without boarding passes. I know a lot of people mourn the loss of the ability to go directly to the gate to meet or see off family.
- camillomiller 8y ago
  They take pictures and fingerprints of foreigners when you arrive in the USA as well. I hope no families at the gates will be allowed. People are already clueless about how to properly cue and board a plane. As a frequent flyer it is beyond irritating. Families or friends at the gate would just make things even worse. Plus, letting them in without a boarding pass is just a way to add insecurity variables to the airport experience for no reason but the movie-like romantic idea of airport goodbyes.

marcus_holmes 8y ago

meh. I flew into Thailand yesterday. They took my photo. Cambodia took my photo and my fingerprints. Nepal took my photo. The UK took my photo and compared it to the one encoded in my UK passport. As did Australia (with my Aussie passport). I know "America = Freedom", but pretty soon it's going to be the same situation as we have with gmail - you may not use gmail because you don't want Google hoovering your conversation to target ads with, but if anyone cc'd in the chain uses gmail, google gets it anyway. Whatever country you traveled to or from is going to get your biometrics, and they're probably sharing that info with the US anyway. I get the point of protesting this, but it feels kinda academic now. I'm not saying I like giving up my freedom for convenience, but I am fed up of standing for hours in lines for "security" checks that are just theater, when they've got the information from other sources anyway. The automated checks using the biometric information in my passport(s) feel so much quicker and less biased (e.g. Thai immigration officer getting into a long conversation with a Chinese tourist about what hotel they were staying at).

opportune 8y ago
It only feels academic because not enough people care. But it's not set in stone that people won't care. Sadly, it may take very major data privacy or biometric abuse for there to ever be action.

gumby 8y ago

What problem is being solved here? I didn’t see any explanation.

caconym_ 8y ago
The problem of how to gradually implement a pervasive surveillance state without at any one time arousing people's suspicions to the point where they will actually do something meaningful about it? Seriously, though, I would love to know the actual motivation for this. Somehow these days I have trouble attributing changes like this to simple bureaucratic momentum.

cm2187 8y ago

What I don't understand is why? Is it in response to an increase in plane hijackings in the US since 9/11? Unless the terrorists board with machine guns, 9/11 wouldn't be possible today. No passenger would assume that a bunch of middle eastern hijackers have any other intention than to kill them all, and it would be impossible for the hijackers to control the passengers.

tehwebguy 8y ago
Unless attackers bring a circular saw and an extension cord to cut open the cockpit door they can bring a damn bomb if they want. No one is going to give up the plans and turn their bomb into a missile ever again.

crististm 8y ago

I've always wondered what is the process that generates this kind of proposals. Was it a single person? A group conspiring from within to perpetuate the power of the TSA? Or from outside, influencing or enforcing the directors to take some actions? How do they come to be? And what strategy do they use to bootstrap the authority and support of the project? Puss in Boots always comes to my mind.

thecopy 8y ago

TSA and airport security-theatre in the USA is such a mind-boggling concept to me. Im flying a lot within Europe, especially between Sweden and Switzerland, and i have never had to show my passport to anyone. More often than not they don't check the fluids in my carry-on, and i get to keep my shoes on. The security check usually takes 5-10 minutes including the time spent queuing.

CalRobert 8y ago
Huh, have you flown Ryanair? I think they demand a passport from everyone.
- jaclaz 8y ago
  In Europe (Schengen) you need not a passport (in the sense of a document valid for crossing a border) but you still need an ID card (all countries in Europe have these AFAIK) when boarding a plane. There was a lot of fuzz here in Italy some ten years ago about Ryan Air not accepting as ID some particular forms of ID cards because of some fine interpretation of the Law. In Italy a number of documents (driving license, boat driving license, other kinds of government issued ID cards, such as police ID cards, gun carrying permit, or similar) are considered as substituting the national ID card for the identification of someone, but for taking a plane only the national ID card (or a passport) is considered valid.
  - thecopy 8y ago
    I never shown my ID to anyone when flying between ZRH and ARN. When flying from Nice I had to present it though, but they barely looked, and just waved me through.
  - CalRobert 8y ago
    I know you can fly without a passport within Schengen, I just meant that Ryanair appear to unilaterally require one even within Schengen.
    - 8y ago

crististm 8y ago

In a way, they are forced to do this by their nature. As an abstract entity they should not and will not care about consequences other than making their job easier. But it operates in a world where other entities might come in play and counter. The problem is that I don't hear the voices of these other entities. Is TSA that powerful on its own?