11 ms·

Should the police be able to investigate your genetic family tree for any crime?

106 points by tysone 7y ago

LurkersWillLurk 7y ago
I'm reminded of parallels between cell phone location privacy and genetic tracking. The average person does not understand that they are creating a record of everywhere they go when they have their cell phone on. The same is true with your DNA - while it's true that you do in fact leave a literal trace of your genes, you don't expect that you could be identified later on simply by the fact that you had lunch. What we really need is a legislative solution, but unfortunately I have low expectations for Congress, seeing that Carpenter v. United States even had to happen.
- redm 7y ago
  I like your analogy, I'd add that DNA search/collection is akin to scanning cell phone records to see who was in the area at the time of the crime. Which typically requires a warrant.
- decoyworker 7y ago
  What would you legislate? Your location is not private information and never has been. Not sure how you could even legislate to make your DNA protected private information- under HIPPA for instance, considering you leave it everywhere you go. Your fingerprint is not private, your face is not private, and your DNA is not private. I'm not sure how they could be.
  - village-idiot 7y ago
    Your location isn’t private if you’re observed in a location where you have no expectation of privacy, i.e. outside. But if I’m at a friends house, I absolutely have an expectation that my presence in their home is private to the world at large. The problem is that dragnet surveillance does not: 1. Handle the subtleties of how we expect privacy to work. 2. Require direct observation of someone in a context where there is no expectation of privacy. It just works all the time, and contains the ability to unmask private events in the past.
    - leetcrew 7y ago
      your expectation of privacy is sort of inconsistent here. if you don't have an expectation of privacy when your out in the world, and it's fair game for people to observe you traveling to your friend's house, how can you expect that your presence is private?
      - bilbo0s 7y ago
        I can't speak to whether that is inconsistent or not, but in support of HN User'village-idiot', I think it'd be a pretty big bummer for people to find out that any tryst they have with a lover is not private, but public in nature. Taking your phone or your DNA to any such tryst makes it so apparently. What's worse, there will likely be a lot of scope creep. It's showing up in criminal court. It's showing up in civil court cases. It's definitely going to be showing up in family court. Etc etc etc.
        leetcrew 7y ago
        > I can't speak to whether that is inconsistent or not, but in support of HN User'village-idiot', I think it'd be a pretty big bummer for people to find out that any tryst they have with a lover is not private, but public in nature. it's a bummer for sure, but it's been this way for a while. it's perfectly legal for your wife to hire a PI to follow you around. the police also don't need a warrant to observe your movements. the part that's new is that all this surveillance can be done passively without any particular reason to suspect you. imo, the distinction between public and private spaces is pretty reasonable for targeted investigations and observation by fellow citizens. in my view, the real problem is how long information should be stored, especially when collected passively.
      - pixl97 7y ago
        My problem is the scale of the issue, at least when it comes to phones. If I am at my friens the people involved are apt to forget almost everything in a few days. The cellphone tracking system, in theory, will studiously remember exactly where you are till the end of time by a company wit history of give or selling said data to the government in secret.
- nradov 7y ago
  The average person knows that cell phone location tracking can be used as evidence in criminal investigations. It shows up all the time in TV and movies.
  - ryanmcbride 7y ago
    I agree with you but there's still this weird disconnect where people believe they can be tracked realtime by their phone, but not historically. They know their phone can be 'triangulated' when the cops are actively looking at them, but everyone I show their phone's location history to freaks out about it.
- lifeisstillgood 7y ago
  I think this is going to be beyond one country legislators in the vein of GDPR (becoming de facto across the "Western" region). I am hoping for something think a presumption of data ownership for anything the individual "creates" like digital footprints
- gingabriska 7y ago
  Imagine if some spy on espionage mission has sex with you and police/intelligence finds your dna in her bedroom or inside her, and now you'll be under investigation and maybe torchered too to reveal something you've no idea about. I am not sure if it's possible in first world countries but many countries where these companies will soon offer such investigative service to local intelligence/police department have very high chance to do exactly that.
  - castis 7y ago
    If an actor were to go through that much effort to get DNA from someone, I doubt they would be concerned with the legalities of it.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  I think in general, people who are aware of DNA used as evidence don't understand that it isn't perfect, that most matches are (somewhat) loose statistical matches. Lots of people probably aren't aware of it though.
cameronbrown 7y ago
Genetic data affects not just an individual but their family tree as well. Maybe a warrant should have to be issued for all of them to get access to this data.
- enriquto 7y ago
  But wouldn't this conflict to the (natural?) right of an individual to publish their own data? Do I need a permission from all my family tree to be allowed to publish the contents of my DNA?
  - LeifCarrotson 7y ago
    If, outside of our control, your password and mine matched except for one character and that near match was public knowledge, would you object to me publishing my password here in cleartext? There's a big difference between publishing your own thoughts - which may have nothing to do with what your family thinks - and publishing your DNA, which is inextricably tied to that of your family. It's my data, which I have a "natural" right to share as I see fit, but it's also very similar to yours, which you have a right to keep private. These rights are incompatible, one has to give.
    - enriquto 7y ago
      I do not know. It seems and interesting and difficult question!
    - leetcrew 7y ago
      > If, outside of our control, your password and mine matched except for one character and that near match was public knowledge, would you object to me publishing my password here in cleartext? I would certainly prefer that you not do that, but I don't think I should be able to to compel you not to. this is sort of a weird example because there's no clear benefit to posting your password. a similar example: you and I both live in the same apartment building. you really hate my best friend and don't want them to know where you live. my best friend already knows that you and I live in the same apartment building. should you be able to prevent me from giving my address to my friend so we can hang out?
dade_ 7y ago
DNA should only be used to prove innocence and to corroborate other evidence. Just because someone's DNA is there, doesn't mean they did something. It is too easy to start planting DNA. If there is other evidence and their DNA is there, then yeah. Book 'em Danno!
- jacquesm 7y ago
  That's a pretty good starting point. DNA will be falsifiable soon enough too which will render the whole idea of DNA as evidence of anything moot.
- e40 7y ago
  But there are some cases where there is only DNA. There is a double murder going to trial soon where DNA found via GEDmatch is the only evidence. My fear is that planting DNA isn't something individuals are likely to do (thought it's not impossible), but something the state or large organizations are likely to have the resources to do properly. Corrupt LEOs. Corrupt politicians. It seems a lot easier than many alternative corrupt practices.
  - cm2187 7y ago
    Mixing/pollution of DNA samples in DNA testing labs (or faked DNA tests by unscrupulous labs) can also have some pretty bad consequences and have in the past.
  - village-idiot 7y ago
    DNA also just ends up all over the place for innocent reasons. If someone gets murdered in a rental car that I rented last month, chances are my dna will be there. DNA evidence often struggles when it comes to temporality, as it can tell you who and where, but it can’t tell you when the evidence was placed there. Historically there have been some pretty bad abuses in court over the accuracy and reliability of dna evidence, with some convictions that had to later get overturned.
  - DocTomoe 7y ago
    Who needs corruption when you can have sheer incompetence? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn
mikkom 7y ago
> If the police felt free to use it in an assault case, why not shoplifting, trespassing or littering? For the same reason dna tests are not already used for shoplifting, trespassing or littering?
- MichaelApproved 7y ago
  And that reason is...?
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    DNA has almost no probative value in those cases, since they almost never involve a sample which can be genotyped that has a high probability of being linked to a particular crime.
- JulianMorrison 7y ago
  Cost, which is falling. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlson_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlson_curve )
buro9 7y ago
I've heard it argued that the police and other authorities have the right to know who you are. Is this really the case? Does a representative of a government have the right to your identity? If so... is there an extent to which they can know who are you are? The difference here between a vague answer, a trust based assertion, or even a deep proof.
- dangerface 7y ago
  There is a distinction between your identity(who you are) and your legal identity(who the governments papers say you are). Your legal identity is created with your birth certificate and ends with your death certificate. Legaly you agreed to act under this legal identity when your birth certificate was created but since you where too young to give consent its not legaly binding. Thats the argument but it would need to go through a judge who wont care about technicality of law as the law itself is a technicality to justify government.
  - DanBC 7y ago
    This is direct from Freeman on the land conspiracy theory, and it's a legal nonsense.
    - dangerface 7y ago
      If this has been debunked I would like to know and stop repeating it, can you provide links?
  - hash872 7y ago
    A sovereign citizen on HN!! Wow, I never thought I'd see the day. If anyone is bored, please feel free to kill 30 minutes on https://www.reddit.com/r/Sovereigncitizen/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Sovereigncitizen/
sysbin 7y ago
I think the justice system needs to be reformed to a rehabilitation modal and before it's able to investigate one's genetic family tree for any crime. I've studied neuro science and the philosophy of determinism to realize people don't have any real control for their actions. So right now I think we're failing when it comes to humanity.
- 420codebro 7y ago
  Yeah let's just throw our hands up and go "awww shucks". Pass.
whack 7y ago
Many of the comments here seem to assume that the use of DNA tests without the accused's consent is a bad thing. I fail to see why. We use facial features and eyewitness-testimony to ID criminal dependents all the time. No one argues that consent/warrant is needed in order to ID someone using their facial features. More generally speaking, I fail to see the harm that can arise from using DNA to identify suspects, whereas the benefits are so much more compelling.
- rocqua 7y ago
  DNA is only circumstantial. Being a suspect is harmful. Hence DNA testing could make innocent people suspects and thus harm them. Since harming innocents is bad, there is a downside to wide usage of DNA tests. Whether tgat downside weighs up against the upside is a debate. But we need to acknowledge there is a debate to be had.
  - whack 7y ago
    Sure, but I think it's also worth acknowledging that suspects get identified all the time on the basis of circumstantial evidence far flimsier than DNA traces. The "burden of proof" needed for the police to investigate someone as a suspect is extremely low, for good reasons.
cm2187 7y ago
That's the case in France where DNA samples are taken on any person arrested, whether they committed a crime or not, including demonstrators (or bystanders) in a political march. The national DNA database now includes over 5 percent of the population and it is a great tool for the police since the authors of serious crimes typically have almost always committed petty crimes before. It also means that you can solve small crimes like burglaries with DNA. It is a bit worrying from a privacy protection point of view though. And I barely see this database ever questioned by the French press.
- masklinn 7y ago
  > That's the case in France where DNA samples are taken on any person arrested, whether they committed a crime or not, including demonstrators (or bystanders) in a political march. FWIW ~20 US states do the same, this was ruled legal in 2013 (Maryland v. King, DNA collection is part of police booking procedure). CODIS (the FBI's DNA database) contains more than 17 million non-forensic profiles[0], that's also >5% of the population. But wait, there's more! The Department of Defense's own DNA database (DoDSR) has more than 50 million records (collection started in the 80s and every applicant to a uniformed service gets included), and since the 2003 National Defense Authorization Act can be accessed by federal or military investigations for "the purpose of an investigation or prosecution of a felony, or any sexual offense, for which no other source of DNA information is reasonably available". So it can't currently be searched / "wild matched" against an unknown sample but if there's a suspect, a sample and no other DNA source then it's an option. [0] https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/ndis-statistics https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/c...
  - searine 7y ago
    >The Department of Defense's own DNA database (DoDSR) The reality of this is that it's just a big ass warehouse deep in the farmland of Virginia which houses unprocessed tubes of DNA. Its like the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Sounds nefarious but it is actually a goldmine for genetics research.
    - 7y ago
zebraflask 7y ago
Interestingly enough, I recently received a bulk email from GEDMatch.com about exactly this subject. They changed their TOS so that now users need to explicitly opt in to sharing their data with law enforcement. That's good for user privacy, but it does make me wonder what they were doing before this change.
- Real_S 7y ago
  The Daily did a podcast interviewing the founder of GEDmatch. Part1: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/06/podcasts/the-daily/dna-genealogy-crime.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/06/podcasts/the-daily/dna-ge... Part2: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/podcasts/the-daily/genealogy-dna-crime-privacy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/podcasts/the-daily/geneal...
randaouser 7y ago
I built a prototype of a Private Set Intersetion using elliptic curve homomorphic encryption method for this very use case: The scenario goes 1) FBI indexes the dna using MASH algorithm (minhash like locality sensitive hashing of genomic sequences) of the person they are searching for. They then use homomorphic encryption and post this encrypted data online with a bounty for anyone to claim. 2)Now, individuals and corporations can try to claim the bounty; they also run MASH on their dna databases and encrypt each mash index using the same homomorphic strategy and submit it back to the FBI. 3)The FBI can now complete the private set intersection algorithm on the encrypted data and will only reveal information iff an assailants genealogy is found. The remaining sequences appear cryptographically random and thus protect the privacy of those persons. I am currently working in blockchain space. If you want to know more feel free to message me.
- angersock 7y ago
  Why would you help the police state?
- Real_S 7y ago
  Excellent application of homomorphic encryption! Did you design your prototype for SNP data, like that used in GED match? Or for CODIS Core STR data, used by the Rapid DNA identification systems? PS: Your profile does not contain contact info. Message me if you would like to converse privately.
- gloflo 7y ago
  Please stop making the world a worse place to live in.
- rhcom2 7y ago
  It sounds like you're suggesting the FBI outsource their Fourth Amendment violations.
mikece 7y ago
Seems to me the legal question is whether it's a reasonable search. If a court rules in the affirmative that poses a second question: search what, and does that imply that right for police to collect DNA evidence in order to conduct a thorough search?
opwieurposiu 7y ago
Sure, but we need to publish the DNA and contact info of anyone who becomes a police officer. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
basicplus2 7y ago
All those DNA tests with ancestry.com are also free fodder for the five eyes and law enforcement
atoav 7y ago
I think whether you find this useful or dangerous hinges entirely on your perspective on governments and history. If you are sure governments are mostly a force for good and democracy is suited to keep it that way indefinitly, overpowered permissions like these have no real downside. As engineers we certainly also ask ourselves how systems fail when something goes wrong, even if all we do is to prevent this. This kind of power is not only a possibility for a state to become more powerful, it is also the perfect ethnic genocide toolkit and therefore something that makes it substancially more dangerous for a state to fail. Separation of powers, the oversight of the press, limited power and information for the state over the individual without good reason – all these mechanisms are there for a systemic reason. These reasons are sometimes only to make it harder for governments to drift into unlawful and unjust behaviour. Any change to the balance of power between executive, juridicative, legislative ans public should be carefully considered before executed. So this must really pay off in order to be useful enough to justify the risk that comes with it, including the (in?)effectiveness of punishments and the cost of prevention through other means than harsh punishment.
haxorito 7y ago
In broad sense all investigation techniques are privacy invasion: surveillance, search, detention or arrest. I think we should let law enforcement use DNA sources. But it should be heavily regulated, and under heavy control. Let’s say anonymous inquiry that just return yes/no and then you need court to reveal identity.
el_cujo 7y ago
I'm glad the Original Night Stalker was caught, but I found it very disturbing he was caught based on another family member doing one of those ancestory DNA things. Also, offtopic, but that dendrogram in the first picture is a very incestual family tree.
xenocyon 7y ago
Data scientist here. I'm surprised nobody here has yet mentioned the false-positive issue with trawling a large dataset: even a tiny false positive rate leads to a very high probability of convicting an innocent person if you mine a large enough database.
- chopin 7y ago
  But the only reason for such a database is to get a conviction. Case solved.

106 points by tysone 7y ago

I'm reminded of parallels between cell phone location privacy and genetic tracking. The average person does not understand that they are creating a record of everywhere they go when they have their cell phone on. The same is true with your DNA - while it's true that you do in fact leave a literal trace of your genes, you don't expect that you could be identified later on simply by the fact that you had lunch. What we really need is a legislative solution, but unfortunately I have low expectations for Congress, seeing that Carpenter v. United States even had to happen.

redm 7y ago
I like your analogy, I'd add that DNA search/collection is akin to scanning cell phone records to see who was in the area at the time of the crime. Which typically requires a warrant.
decoyworker 7y ago
What would you legislate? Your location is not private information and never has been. Not sure how you could even legislate to make your DNA protected private information- under HIPPA for instance, considering you leave it everywhere you go. Your fingerprint is not private, your face is not private, and your DNA is not private. I'm not sure how they could be.
- village-idiot 7y ago
  Your location isn’t private if you’re observed in a location where you have no expectation of privacy, i.e. outside. But if I’m at a friends house, I absolutely have an expectation that my presence in their home is private to the world at large. The problem is that dragnet surveillance does not: 1. Handle the subtleties of how we expect privacy to work. 2. Require direct observation of someone in a context where there is no expectation of privacy. It just works all the time, and contains the ability to unmask private events in the past.
  - leetcrew 7y ago
    your expectation of privacy is sort of inconsistent here. if you don't have an expectation of privacy when your out in the world, and it's fair game for people to observe you traveling to your friend's house, how can you expect that your presence is private?
    - bilbo0s 7y ago
      I can't speak to whether that is inconsistent or not, but in support of HN User'village-idiot', I think it'd be a pretty big bummer for people to find out that any tryst they have with a lover is not private, but public in nature. Taking your phone or your DNA to any such tryst makes it so apparently. What's worse, there will likely be a lot of scope creep. It's showing up in criminal court. It's showing up in civil court cases. It's definitely going to be showing up in family court. Etc etc etc.
      - leetcrew 7y ago
        > I can't speak to whether that is inconsistent or not, but in support of HN User'village-idiot', I think it'd be a pretty big bummer for people to find out that any tryst they have with a lover is not private, but public in nature. it's a bummer for sure, but it's been this way for a while. it's perfectly legal for your wife to hire a PI to follow you around. the police also don't need a warrant to observe your movements. the part that's new is that all this surveillance can be done passively without any particular reason to suspect you. imo, the distinction between public and private spaces is pretty reasonable for targeted investigations and observation by fellow citizens. in my view, the real problem is how long information should be stored, especially when collected passively.
    - pixl97 7y ago
      My problem is the scale of the issue, at least when it comes to phones. If I am at my friens the people involved are apt to forget almost everything in a few days. The cellphone tracking system, in theory, will studiously remember exactly where you are till the end of time by a company wit history of give or selling said data to the government in secret.
nradov 7y ago
The average person knows that cell phone location tracking can be used as evidence in criminal investigations. It shows up all the time in TV and movies.
- ryanmcbride 7y ago
  I agree with you but there's still this weird disconnect where people believe they can be tracked realtime by their phone, but not historically. They know their phone can be 'triangulated' when the cops are actively looking at them, but everyone I show their phone's location history to freaks out about it.
lifeisstillgood 7y ago
I think this is going to be beyond one country legislators in the vein of GDPR (becoming de facto across the "Western" region). I am hoping for something think a presumption of data ownership for anything the individual "creates" like digital footprints
gingabriska 7y ago
Imagine if some spy on espionage mission has sex with you and police/intelligence finds your dna in her bedroom or inside her, and now you'll be under investigation and maybe torchered too to reveal something you've no idea about. I am not sure if it's possible in first world countries but many countries where these companies will soon offer such investigative service to local intelligence/police department have very high chance to do exactly that.
- castis 7y ago
  If an actor were to go through that much effort to get DNA from someone, I doubt they would be concerned with the legalities of it.
maxerickson 7y ago
I think in general, people who are aware of DNA used as evidence don't understand that it isn't perfect, that most matches are (somewhat) loose statistical matches. Lots of people probably aren't aware of it though.

cameronbrown 7y ago

Genetic data affects not just an individual but their family tree as well. Maybe a warrant should have to be issued for all of them to get access to this data.

enriquto 7y ago
But wouldn't this conflict to the (natural?) right of an individual to publish their own data? Do I need a permission from all my family tree to be allowed to publish the contents of my DNA?
- LeifCarrotson 7y ago
  If, outside of our control, your password and mine matched except for one character and that near match was public knowledge, would you object to me publishing my password here in cleartext? There's a big difference between publishing your own thoughts - which may have nothing to do with what your family thinks - and publishing your DNA, which is inextricably tied to that of your family. It's my data, which I have a "natural" right to share as I see fit, but it's also very similar to yours, which you have a right to keep private. These rights are incompatible, one has to give.
  - enriquto 7y ago
    I do not know. It seems and interesting and difficult question!
  - leetcrew 7y ago
    > If, outside of our control, your password and mine matched except for one character and that near match was public knowledge, would you object to me publishing my password here in cleartext? I would certainly prefer that you not do that, but I don't think I should be able to to compel you not to. this is sort of a weird example because there's no clear benefit to posting your password. a similar example: you and I both live in the same apartment building. you really hate my best friend and don't want them to know where you live. my best friend already knows that you and I live in the same apartment building. should you be able to prevent me from giving my address to my friend so we can hang out?

dade_ 7y ago

DNA should only be used to prove innocence and to corroborate other evidence. Just because someone's DNA is there, doesn't mean they did something. It is too easy to start planting DNA. If there is other evidence and their DNA is there, then yeah. Book 'em Danno!

jacquesm 7y ago
That's a pretty good starting point. DNA will be falsifiable soon enough too which will render the whole idea of DNA as evidence of anything moot.
e40 7y ago
But there are some cases where there is only DNA. There is a double murder going to trial soon where DNA found via GEDmatch is the only evidence. My fear is that planting DNA isn't something individuals are likely to do (thought it's not impossible), but something the state or large organizations are likely to have the resources to do properly. Corrupt LEOs. Corrupt politicians. It seems a lot easier than many alternative corrupt practices.
- cm2187 7y ago
  Mixing/pollution of DNA samples in DNA testing labs (or faked DNA tests by unscrupulous labs) can also have some pretty bad consequences and have in the past.
- village-idiot 7y ago
  DNA also just ends up all over the place for innocent reasons. If someone gets murdered in a rental car that I rented last month, chances are my dna will be there. DNA evidence often struggles when it comes to temporality, as it can tell you who and where, but it can’t tell you when the evidence was placed there. Historically there have been some pretty bad abuses in court over the accuracy and reliability of dna evidence, with some convictions that had to later get overturned.
- DocTomoe 7y ago
  Who needs corruption when you can have sheer incompetence? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn

mikkom 7y ago

> If the police felt free to use it in an assault case, why not shoplifting, trespassing or littering? For the same reason dna tests are not already used for shoplifting, trespassing or littering?

MichaelApproved 7y ago
And that reason is...?
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  DNA has almost no probative value in those cases, since they almost never involve a sample which can be genotyped that has a high probability of being linked to a particular crime.
JulianMorrison 7y ago
Cost, which is falling. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlson_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlson_curve )

buro9 7y ago

I've heard it argued that the police and other authorities have the right to know who you are. Is this really the case? Does a representative of a government have the right to your identity? If so... is there an extent to which they can know who are you are? The difference here between a vague answer, a trust based assertion, or even a deep proof.

dangerface 7y ago
There is a distinction between your identity(who you are) and your legal identity(who the governments papers say you are). Your legal identity is created with your birth certificate and ends with your death certificate. Legaly you agreed to act under this legal identity when your birth certificate was created but since you where too young to give consent its not legaly binding. Thats the argument but it would need to go through a judge who wont care about technicality of law as the law itself is a technicality to justify government.
- DanBC 7y ago
  This is direct from Freeman on the land conspiracy theory, and it's a legal nonsense.
  - dangerface 7y ago
    If this has been debunked I would like to know and stop repeating it, can you provide links?
- hash872 7y ago
  A sovereign citizen on HN!! Wow, I never thought I'd see the day. If anyone is bored, please feel free to kill 30 minutes on https://www.reddit.com/r/Sovereigncitizen/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Sovereigncitizen/

sysbin 7y ago

I think the justice system needs to be reformed to a rehabilitation modal and before it's able to investigate one's genetic family tree for any crime. I've studied neuro science and the philosophy of determinism to realize people don't have any real control for their actions. So right now I think we're failing when it comes to humanity.

420codebro 7y ago
Yeah let's just throw our hands up and go "awww shucks". Pass.

whack 7y ago

Many of the comments here seem to assume that the use of DNA tests without the accused's consent is a bad thing. I fail to see why. We use facial features and eyewitness-testimony to ID criminal dependents all the time. No one argues that consent/warrant is needed in order to ID someone using their facial features. More generally speaking, I fail to see the harm that can arise from using DNA to identify suspects, whereas the benefits are so much more compelling.

rocqua 7y ago
DNA is only circumstantial. Being a suspect is harmful. Hence DNA testing could make innocent people suspects and thus harm them. Since harming innocents is bad, there is a downside to wide usage of DNA tests. Whether tgat downside weighs up against the upside is a debate. But we need to acknowledge there is a debate to be had.
- whack 7y ago
  Sure, but I think it's also worth acknowledging that suspects get identified all the time on the basis of circumstantial evidence far flimsier than DNA traces. The "burden of proof" needed for the police to investigate someone as a suspect is extremely low, for good reasons.

cm2187 7y ago

That's the case in France where DNA samples are taken on any person arrested, whether they committed a crime or not, including demonstrators (or bystanders) in a political march. The national DNA database now includes over 5 percent of the population and it is a great tool for the police since the authors of serious crimes typically have almost always committed petty crimes before. It also means that you can solve small crimes like burglaries with DNA. It is a bit worrying from a privacy protection point of view though. And I barely see this database ever questioned by the French press.

masklinn 7y ago
> That's the case in France where DNA samples are taken on any person arrested, whether they committed a crime or not, including demonstrators (or bystanders) in a political march. FWIW ~20 US states do the same, this was ruled legal in 2013 (Maryland v. King, DNA collection is part of police booking procedure). CODIS (the FBI's DNA database) contains more than 17 million non-forensic profiles[0], that's also >5% of the population. But wait, there's more! The Department of Defense's own DNA database (DoDSR) has more than 50 million records (collection started in the 80s and every applicant to a uniformed service gets included), and since the 2003 National Defense Authorization Act can be accessed by federal or military investigations for "the purpose of an investigation or prosecution of a felony, or any sexual offense, for which no other source of DNA information is reasonably available". So it can't currently be searched / "wild matched" against an unknown sample but if there's a suspect, a sample and no other DNA source then it's an option. [0] https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/ndis-statistics https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/c...
- searine 7y ago
  >The Department of Defense's own DNA database (DoDSR) The reality of this is that it's just a big ass warehouse deep in the farmland of Virginia which houses unprocessed tubes of DNA. Its like the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Sounds nefarious but it is actually a goldmine for genetics research.
  - 7y ago

zebraflask 7y ago

Interestingly enough, I recently received a bulk email from GEDMatch.com about exactly this subject. They changed their TOS so that now users need to explicitly opt in to sharing their data with law enforcement. That's good for user privacy, but it does make me wonder what they were doing before this change.

Real_S 7y ago
The Daily did a podcast interviewing the founder of GEDmatch. Part1: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/06/podcasts/the-daily/dna-genealogy-crime.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/06/podcasts/the-daily/dna-ge... Part2: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/podcasts/the-daily/genealogy-dna-crime-privacy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/podcasts/the-daily/geneal...

randaouser 7y ago

I built a prototype of a Private Set Intersetion using elliptic curve homomorphic encryption method for this very use case: The scenario goes 1) FBI indexes the dna using MASH algorithm (minhash like locality sensitive hashing of genomic sequences) of the person they are searching for. They then use homomorphic encryption and post this encrypted data online with a bounty for anyone to claim. 2)Now, individuals and corporations can try to claim the bounty; they also run MASH on their dna databases and encrypt each mash index using the same homomorphic strategy and submit it back to the FBI. 3)The FBI can now complete the private set intersection algorithm on the encrypted data and will only reveal information iff an assailants genealogy is found. The remaining sequences appear cryptographically random and thus protect the privacy of those persons. I am currently working in blockchain space. If you want to know more feel free to message me.

angersock 7y ago
Why would you help the police state?
Real_S 7y ago
Excellent application of homomorphic encryption! Did you design your prototype for SNP data, like that used in GED match? Or for CODIS Core STR data, used by the Rapid DNA identification systems? PS: Your profile does not contain contact info. Message me if you would like to converse privately.
gloflo 7y ago
Please stop making the world a worse place to live in.
rhcom2 7y ago
It sounds like you're suggesting the FBI outsource their Fourth Amendment violations.

mikece 7y ago

Seems to me the legal question is whether it's a reasonable search. If a court rules in the affirmative that poses a second question: search what, and does that imply that right for police to collect DNA evidence in order to conduct a thorough search?

opwieurposiu 7y ago

Sure, but we need to publish the DNA and contact info of anyone who becomes a police officer. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

basicplus2 7y ago

All those DNA tests with ancestry.com are also free fodder for the five eyes and law enforcement

atoav 7y ago

I think whether you find this useful or dangerous hinges entirely on your perspective on governments and history. If you are sure governments are mostly a force for good and democracy is suited to keep it that way indefinitly, overpowered permissions like these have no real downside. As engineers we certainly also ask ourselves how systems fail when something goes wrong, even if all we do is to prevent this. This kind of power is not only a possibility for a state to become more powerful, it is also the perfect ethnic genocide toolkit and therefore something that makes it substancially more dangerous for a state to fail. Separation of powers, the oversight of the press, limited power and information for the state over the individual without good reason – all these mechanisms are there for a systemic reason. These reasons are sometimes only to make it harder for governments to drift into unlawful and unjust behaviour. Any change to the balance of power between executive, juridicative, legislative ans public should be carefully considered before executed. So this must really pay off in order to be useful enough to justify the risk that comes with it, including the (in?)effectiveness of punishments and the cost of prevention through other means than harsh punishment.

haxorito 7y ago

In broad sense all investigation techniques are privacy invasion: surveillance, search, detention or arrest. I think we should let law enforcement use DNA sources. But it should be heavily regulated, and under heavy control. Let’s say anonymous inquiry that just return yes/no and then you need court to reveal identity.

el_cujo 7y ago

I'm glad the Original Night Stalker was caught, but I found it very disturbing he was caught based on another family member doing one of those ancestory DNA things. Also, offtopic, but that dendrogram in the first picture is a very incestual family tree.

xenocyon 7y ago

Data scientist here. I'm surprised nobody here has yet mentioned the false-positive issue with trawling a large dataset: even a tiny false positive rate leads to a very high probability of convicting an innocent person if you mine a large enough database.

chopin 7y ago
But the only reason for such a database is to get a conviction. Case solved.