4 ms·

I think this is being blown a bit out of proportion. The government definitely has your passport photo in a database. And since this facial recognition is happe

I think this is being blown a bit out of proportion. The government definitely has your passport photo in a database. And since this facial recognition is happening only at boarding gates of international flights, it’s totally plausible that CBP has an isolated system, where Jetblue operates the device but doesn’t get any of the data.

tdeck 7y ago
But this is a great way to test and refine facial recognition to make it ubiquitous, which has serious implications for the government's ability to track everyone cheaply and with little recourse.
- oceliker 7y ago
  I don’t think it provides a great way of testing and refining. The pictures are taken at a very controlled environment in this case; it doesn’t really generalize to CCTV. I don’t disagree with the argument regarding “normalizing” facial recognition in everyday life, though.
oedmarap 7y ago
I agree with you on this. Also, from the article: > "Once you take that high-quality photograph, why not run it against the FBI database? Why not run it against state databases of people with outstanding warrants?" I actually have no issue here. I would love it if law enforcement is aided in doing their job. I really don't want someone evading arrest for a recent violent crime or a person on the FBI's wanted list trying to board an aircraft with other passengers and succeeding. My issue is transparency on the data governance, security, and data residency of the entire system viz. where it's stored, who has access, and how is it accessed. OK equates to only the government having the database, secure access done remotely via API by the airline at check-in and boarding, a human present to verify any anomalies with the facial recognition & records access, and the boarding pass/ID/PP being used as a second factor if necessary. NOT OK equates to a private company running a central database, local copies of any database being stored by any airline, having facial recognition as the only option available, and having the data shared with any entity other than law enforcement.

tdeck 7y ago

But this is a great way to test and refine facial recognition to make it ubiquitous, which has serious implications for the government's ability to track everyone cheaply and with little recourse.

oceliker 7y ago
I don’t think it provides a great way of testing and refining. The pictures are taken at a very controlled environment in this case; it doesn’t really generalize to CCTV. I don’t disagree with the argument regarding “normalizing” facial recognition in everyday life, though.

oedmarap 7y ago

I agree with you on this. Also, from the article: > "Once you take that high-quality photograph, why not run it against the FBI database? Why not run it against state databases of people with outstanding warrants?" I actually have no issue here. I would love it if law enforcement is aided in doing their job. I really don't want someone evading arrest for a recent violent crime or a person on the FBI's wanted list trying to board an aircraft with other passengers and succeeding. My issue is transparency on the data governance, security, and data residency of the entire system viz. where it's stored, who has access, and how is it accessed. OK equates to only the government having the database, secure access done remotely via API by the airline at check-in and boarding, a human present to verify any anomalies with the facial recognition & records access, and the boarding pass/ID/PP being used as a second factor if necessary. NOT OK equates to a private company running a central database, local copies of any database being stored by any airline, having facial recognition as the only option available, and having the data shared with any entity other than law enforcement.