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 agains

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.