11 ms·

Senators say TSA's facial recognition program is out of control

• blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  I was shocked to see this program arrive in my local airport. I opt out every time, but the horrifying thing is that almost everyone simply complies with whatever is asked of them. The TSA agents use phrasing that make it seem like you are supposed to go through the facial recognition process and don’t have a choice. Yes, there are tiny signs scattered around that say you can opt out. But when the officer says “step in front of the camera”, most people comply with what seems like orders from a legal authority.
  • bananapub 2y ago
    Americans can opt out.
    • kareemm 2y ago
      Nope - Canadian here, opted out in Austin.
      • swat535 2y ago
        Unless you are a Canadian born in an undesirable country: Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, .. etc. It doesn't matter if you are citizen and have a passport, you will always be racially profiled when crossing the US unfortunately and I bet the experience will be much worse under the new Administration.
    • monksy 2y ago
      You're talking about the border exit. We're talking about security after checkin.
  • corytheboyd 2y ago
    People just want to get through an incredibly annoying experience as fast as possible, and they know the people behind them want this too. Doesn’t excuse the bullshit, but it’s much less of a dramatic “sheep bowing to authority” than made out to be here.
    • BadHumans 2y ago
      This is it. I don't think I've opted out of it. I know I can but I know the agent is going to make a big deal of it and the line is already long for everyone behind me so whatever lets just get through it.
      • jkestner 2y ago
        Nah. In my experience when you opt out, they say “Okay,” scan your ID the same way they’ve been doing for 20 years, and you get through in the same time. If they want to entice us with convenience, the facial recognition should allow you to just stroll through without talking to anyone.
        • BadHumans 2y ago
          I'll do it next time I'm flying to see what happens.
  • snakeyjake 2y ago
    Generally speaking you present ID to pass through security. The facial recognition is based on the biometric data collected when you got your ID, the ID you presented to pass through security. The ID with your name, address, date of birth, and uniquely identifying number on it. The ID which is associated with your boarding pass. The ID they scan (or they scan the boarding pass which is associated with your ID) prior to letting you through security. Using facial recognition changes nothing, absolutely nothing, except that it reduces the amount of time spent at the checkpoint. It does not grant anyone access to any information they do not already have. It does not impede the traveler in any way. It does not change, at all, any aspect of one's privacy whatsoever. "But I don't wanna..." doesn't seem like a defensible position.
    • goalieca 2y ago
      Maybe I’m old school but I despise the idea of the government tracking me as I travel. Time and time again they are caught violating privacy laws and abusing power.
      • ipython 2y ago
        Given that you already need government issued ID that matches the name printed on your ticket to travel on an airplane, wouldn’t the government already have the ability to track you, regardless of facial recognition?
        • toomuchtodo 2y ago
          Indeed, the government doesn't even need the ID, they ingest a data feed of Passenger Name Records (PNRs) from all airlines. This is why when TSA performs the automated identity proofing, comparing a photo of you to your ID, they don't require that you provide a boarding pass. Comparing an ephemeral photo taken of you to your government credential at the TSA checkpoint is a temporary formality. At some point, the government credential presentation will be unnecessary. https://www.cbp.gov/travel/clearing-cbp/passenger-name-record https://www.cbp.gov/travel/clearing-cbp/passenger-name-recor... (Control-F "What information is collected?")
  • mdorazio 2y ago
    What do you think opting out does exactly? For the system to work they must already have your photo associated with your name and ID. And even if you opt out they’re still tracking your movement. It seems like an impotent protest so I don’t bother.
    • eesmith 2y ago
      They make it opt out so they don't need to demonstrate the cost/benefits of making it required. They make it opt out because there are always a few people who object[1], so this is a safety valve. If everyone opted out ("I am Spartacus") then it would stop and they would have to switch to less efficient means. (If it weren't less efficient then they wouldn't need this one.) As John Gilmore points out at http://new.toad.com/gnu/ http://new.toad.com/gnu/ : "If you politely decline to show ID whenever someone asks (or demands) it, and continue politely declining regardless of how they escalate, you will discover what your rights are. You'll be surprised. You'll get away with it. Most of the people who were asking for it have no right to demand it. They've been relying on your voluntary cooperation. They forgot to tell you that part; but you just found it out for yourself. Sometimes you may discover that you didn't have the right to live, move around, or do business in your own country without government-issued documents. That's very interesting knowledge to acquire first-hand too. If you haven't recently tried exercising your right to exist and live without government permission, are you sure you still have that right?" [1] In one of the author Robert Heinlein's biographical accounts he walks out of a hotel because they demand to see id at registration. He went to another hotel which did not.
  • Spooky23 2y ago
    What are you opting out of? Every state id picture is run through facial recognition, and that data is processed to detect duplicate people and other issues. Every passport has a picture which is digitized for facial recognition. This is a good thing, as it potentially disarms the stupid RealID fiasco with respect to ID and airports. There is no privacy benefit to document validation.
  • _yb2s 2y ago
    TSA will punish you for opting out of anything. If you're lucky, the least they will do is hold you up a long time so you have a good chance of missing your flight. I've also had them sexually harass me, and confiscate (e.g. steal) legal items in retaliation for opting out of things I had the legal right to opt out of. They know people are in a hurry and won't do anything about being treated unethically or illegally, because calling them out would require missing your flight. When I opted out of the scanner once, I had to wait about 20 minutes, and then the TSA agent comes over to do a "pat down" instead, but is going inappropriately slow and squeezing my body, and saying things like "I'd bet you opted out because you like this." I regret not immediately calling them out and filing charges.
    • casenmgreen 2y ago
      I always opt-out, of course. The most recent time, which was years ago now, when I was leaving the country (I'm not a US citizen, and had finished working on a H1-B). In the EU, there's delay - they have to get someone, you go to a room, pat-down. Unremarkable. In the US, delay, they get someone - but the "pat-down" was so forceful I had trouble keeping my balance. It seemed to me to be deliberately excessive. Fortunately, I do not live in, and do not need to travel to, the USA.
    • 1659447091 2y ago
      I would be curious to know which airport(s) you receive this treatment from? I fly regularly between a handful of major US hubs. There is only one airport that I would be vocal about their treatment of passengers to a group of local TSA that I played co-ed sports with. The most senior one's response was that it wasn't surprising as that location (entire airport management) has had a toxic culture from the top down and they were trying to clean it up but it's still a bureaucracy. Anywhere else and I have an agent that would be having an off or bad day, but nothing like what you are describing at any of the others. When I pull the pre-check random scanner check, I opt out and will go straight into small talk with the agent, they don't like it any more than you do, (maybe one or two might) but the majority they want it over with as quickly as you do. My personal tactic is to go into my story of being sexually molested at a checkpoint at an airport in Spain. It was very unexpected and extremely uncomfortable, including the smile after as though waiting for me to drop my number. I can joke about it now, and it gives TSA agents an opening to assure me that is not their intent without being weird about it. They're also annoyed that people who do things like that give them all a bad rep
  • monksy 2y ago
    This isn't a casual mistaken. Taking from the newly implemented border exit control that we've gotten. (If you think we don't have one, re-read that) : The GAO found that the ability for people to understand that Americans are not required to go through the biometric exit was non-existant and the experience of opting out was very poor. What this means is signage was not posted that indicating for Americans this is an optional process and people forming the "requirement" were not educated that it is optional for citizens. Yet, the experience is that people forcefully push people into to posing for the camera with markings on the floor, the lack of opting in/consenting to it, and prevent people from being aware of what's going on. (Yes: You can opt out .. walk up to the board area with your passport open to your photo page)
  • Klonoar 2y ago
    > I opt out every time, but the horrifying thing is that almost everyone simply complies with whatever is asked of them. I honestly blame Apple for pushing FaceID, as it completely normalized facial recognition on a mass scale. Nobody thinks about this at all anymore. (No, it's not entirely Apple's fault, but I do think this point warrants more notice/discussion)
    • Terretta 2y ago
      > Apple's fault Apple showed how this can be done without compromise. A combination of on-device-only FaceID and app-by-app opt-in to even trigger a validation, with on-device federal ID validation of some kind, putting you in control of presenting a cryptographically signed ID, would, in fact, be ideal for both convenience and privacy. IF you're going to require ID, that would be a fine way. The REAL issue is whether ID should be allowed to be required at all to move around, or if you have the right to anonymously assemble (and travel for assembly) within your own national boundary. That's the goalpost to debate.
      • Klonoar 2y ago
        > Apple showed how this can be done without compromise. Sure, but also no. I am outright stating that facial recognition did not need to become so normalized, and everyone getting used to it for the device in their pocket did no good in this regard. > IF you're going to require ID, that would be a fine way. Or we could just, y'know, do it the way we've been doing it for decades now.
• MarkMarine 2y ago
  For this to work they must have already done facial recognition on everyone’s ID photos, so I fail to see what opting out even does for me from a privacy perspective. Seems like shutting the barn door after the horse is already out.
  • bjtitus 2y ago
    Yeah, it seems pretty useless. Nothing stops them from simply doing this on publicly available data online as well. We’ve known for over a decade that DHS, FBI, CBP, and local police buy location data. https://www.propublica.org/article/no-warrant-no-problem-how-the-government-can-still-get-your-digital-data https://www.propublica.org/article/no-warrant-no-problem-how...
  • mingus88 2y ago
    Indeed, not to mention the availability of public social media photos. To think that every intelligence agency on earth hasn’t already trained FR across their databases of IDs and material voluntarily uploaded by themselves and their family/friends… One reason I left Facebook early on was that I didn’t like getting tagged in photos the next morning after everyone would get home from parties. Too bad for me, as long as you have a friend who don’t value your privacy, there is nothing you can do about it. Add to this any public event, where they are well within their rights to take your picture and match it against known threat actors and the only way to not play this game is to be a hermit
    • y-c-o-m-b 2y ago
      > One reason I left Facebook early on was that I didn’t like getting tagged in photos the next morning after everyone would get home from parties. Too bad for me, as long as you have a friend who don’t value your privacy, there is nothing you can do about it. I hated this too, but there was an option to disable it. I know because I used it for that very reason. I don't know if they removed it; I left Facebook probably around a decade ago and it was there when I left.
      • SoftTalker 2y ago
• orev 2y ago
  Making it a requirement sounds like some project manager has a KPI to hit to justify the expense of the hardware rollout. Maybe a stretch since I doubt most people opted out anyway. Either that or they took a page out of the big tech playbook where the plan was to boil the frog all along.
  • davisr 2y ago
    Did you even read the article? And the senators’ letter quotes a talk given by TSA Administrator David Pekoske in 2023 in which he said “we will get to the point where we require biometrics across the board.”
    • toomuchtodo 2y ago
      As opposed to hoping the TSA agent doesn't properly proof you to your government credential you hand them? The data is already there, in state motor vehicle databases, and various federal databases. If you have Global Entry or PreCheck, your biometrics are already on file. The Dept of State has your photo associated with your passport, as does the DoD Common Access Card system. Sibling comment covers this well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42228984 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42228984
• modzu 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • ipython 2y ago
    Elon’s technology first approach would be… to eliminate facial recognition?
    • ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
      Nah. I suspect his first target will be the NLRB.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • EasyMark 2y ago
    Elon doesn’t blow much of anything other than hot air. His joke DOGE will amount to nothing other than another failed ego trip for him and Ramaswamy.
• Zanni 2y ago
  Serious question: why is this bad? Is it just the 3% false negative rate? I don't see the negative privacy implications of face recognition when the alternative is to present your face (via photo ID) anyway.
  • mistrial9 2y ago
    (American here) A quick search shows Pew Research, National Academies Press (associated with the Library Of Congress), AmericaUnderWatch dot com, Politico and Georgetown Law .. all with varying responses to this question. In the case of social structure and law, there are many layers, interwoven, and difficult or impossible to fit into chat-level responses.
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  • goodluckchuck 2y ago
    The leviathan is often arbitrary and capricious.
  • perihelions 2y ago
    I mean, it was living memory for many HN'ers that you could travel freely in the United States with doing either. It's a post-9/11 thing that an airline ticket is associated with a unique person, and requires a matching photo ID. There was a time when America's security forces did not routinely surveil its own peoples' movements.
    • eesmith 2y ago
      When I was a kid there were classified ads like "Pan Am NYC Dec 20-28, E. Smith, $200 o.b.o" for people who wanted to resell their ticket because they couldn't make the trip. There were no id checks then. In the 1990s the airplanes jumped at the opportunity to have required id checks so they could take control of the secondary market. It was still possible to buy a ticket like "E. Smith", but that option was cut off a few years later.
• netsharc 2y ago
  When entering China, they take your fingerprints, iris, and I guess face too... I was there in 2019, at one point I was at an airport, and a screen was bragging, "Stand where the camera can see your face, and we'll tell you which way to your gate.". It worked too, the screen displayed my name, flight number and direction to my gate. And implicitly, "We can identify you wherever you are.".
  • mu53 2y ago
    Facial recognition systems like this are used everywhere in china. Its common for gates in apartment buildings. Its just how things work there. It feel more malicious to pretend its not happening
    • casenmgreen 2y ago
      The problem is that by this it becomes ever more difficult to get rid of an oppressive, dictatorial, unelected and violent Government.
      • bayindirh 2y ago
        For an insider's perspective about "The Social Credit System", and the biometrics which underpin it, you can watch https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system It's a long, but interesting talk.
        • aspenmayer 2y ago
          Also available on the media.ccc.de YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7UKYUTke58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7UKYUTke58
      • tehjoker 2y ago
        tbqh, first if the insinuation is that China is not democratic, that is only true in the sense it is not a liberal democracy with a conservative wing represented (a good thing), but it is still a democracy with elections. secondly, if people surviving a literal genocide in Palestine can resist the most technologically sophisticated, surveilled, and completely enclosed death camp ever constructed by the U.S. and Israel, you can figure out how to deal with cameras.
• quotemstr 2y ago
  I'll take facial recognition over long TSA lines any day. I can't wait until we have full-throughput non-blocking walk-through security.
  • doctorpangloss 2y ago
    “For any amount convenience, it’s okay to discriminate against people based on any collection of facts, including ones you can see on their face like their heritage, so long as none of those facts are mine.”
  • bediger4000 2y ago
    That will never happen. The long lines and inconveniences are the point, not a side effect. How many shoe bombers does the TSA catch in a day? 0. In a month? 0. Since the only shoe bomber? 0. We still take off our shoes. Same with underwear bombs. 0. We still partially undress and do the nude-a-tron. The point is, we could already ditch the lines, we don't want to.
    • jkestner 2y ago
      This anti-tiger rock only costs $10 billion!
      • selimthegrim 2y ago
        Now try the bomb detector wands
    • 0x457 2y ago
      I mean it's like saying what's the point of a security feature if thing that feature prevents from happening isn't happening after implementing that feature.
      • bediger4000 2y ago
        Sure, there's some truth to that, but shoe bombs, underpants bombs and the two liquids bombs have never been tried again. If they did, they would set off their shoes and underpants in the "cattle maze", where there are several planesfull of people, and nobody has been ID'ed, or x-rayed or swabbed. There's nothing magical about setting off a bomb on a plane as far as terrorizing a populace goes. Bombs in the mazes before "security" would be effective, as we learned at the Boston Marathon.
• beej71 2y ago
  I also can't see the tracking difference between a human verifying your identity and entering that into a database and a computer verifying your identity and entering that into a database. But it's still a valid concern as to whether or not this new system is at least as secure and privacy-respecting as the old one.
  • mistercheph 2y ago
    Automation and scale? You can't imagine how technology that allows a small number of people to automatically surveil billions of people can enable horrors that would be more difficult if you needed to use a labor force of hundreds of thousands of humans?
    • 0x457 2y ago
      What that has to do with TSA Checkpoint at the airport? How many people go to through that checkpoint isn't dictated by how automated it is - it's dictated by how many people are flying. All this thing does it speeds up process of you getting through TSA.
      • EasyMark 2y ago
        No faster than having a human hold up your id and compare it, plus now you don’t have yet another digital copy of your face floating around for the police state.
      • kelnos 2y ago
        It doesn't, though. I haven't seen shorter lines or faster-moving lines at SFO, for example, since they implemented facial recognition. And it seems like they have the same number of people staffing the ID checkpoint as they did before as well.
        • 0x457 2y ago
          Well, I've seen faster lines in LAX, so YMMV?
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• xyst 2y ago
  Abolish the TSA completely. Get back the billions in funds that are allocated for this security theatre. Unfortunately this will never happen
  • pdonis 2y ago
    It will happen if enough voters make it clear to their elected representatives that they want them to repeal the laws passed after 9/11 that mandate the security screening that TSA does. I agree that's highly unlikely, but it was voters who clamored for those laws in the first place after 9/11, so it's voters that need to push for getting them repealed.
  • Nasrudith 2y ago
    Not to mention that COVID revealed it all a farce. We have shown that we don't really care about millions dying.
  • paxys 2y ago
    Unless you are implying having no security at airports whatsoever (which will never happen), abolishing TSA simply means replacing one central agency with hundreds/thousands of private security agencies and companies in every state and city, which will only increase costs.
    • eesmith 2y ago
      You should let SFO and the handful of other airports with private security know they can decrease costs by switching to TSA. Except, quoting https://www.marketplace.org/2016/08/11/pros-and-cons-privatizing-airport-security/ https://www.marketplace.org/2016/08/11/pros-and-cons-privati... > Contractors provide a more flexible workforce for his airport, and on top of that, it’s easier to show people the door, he said. > “If employees are not performing, they can be dealt with appropriately, better or more effectively on a contract side than a government side,” Sprenger said. > Labor unions say the real reason airports want to go with contractors is simple: to cut costs. James Mudrock is the president of AFGE Local 1230, the union representing TSA workers in Sacramento, California.
• brians 2y ago
  There is only one sort of person who signs up to check internal passports and search innocent people, and I don’t care what color shirt they’re wearing these days.
  • justinclift 2y ago
    > There is only one sort of person who signs up to check internal passports and search innocent people People needing a job?
• jmward01 2y ago
  Yet again we accept the premise that we need 'more' security so it is OK to do these types of things. This implies without evidence that there is a problem and then jumps right to the, again, unfounded conclusion that this type of thing will solve that hypothetical issue. The discussion shouldn't be about how to do this 'responsibly', implicitly admitting that there is some sort of need, and instead it should be about how to dismantle things like this completely and how to stop new things like this from ever happening again.
  • zekrioca 2y ago
    Why would you think that is, i.e., why is it simply a given that these are ‘more secure’ and that it is needed? This type of take almost looks like a virus.
• morpheuskafka 2y ago
  I don't like TSA or the US security state, but I really find it hard to see why this has attracted so much attention. When you enter the airport, you're surrounded by cameras from numerous government and commercial entities, no doubt performing facial recognition. When you get to your destination, your photo will be taken by the destination country plus countless other surveillance cameras along the way. And unless you like long lines, you've already submitted fingerprints and yet another photo to TSA or CBP for precheck. Even if you didn't, all REAL IDs (except a foreign passport) require digital storage of the ID photo--that's what they are matching your face to at the checkpoint. (During the pandemic, I had a job that let me--I mean, a friend of my choice--do my own e-verify/I-9 form. When you enter your passport number, the e-Verify system spits out a digital copy of the photo you sent it to prevent counterfeit or altered photos.) I just don't understand how one more potato quality still capture of your face, that by definition is very similar to those they already have, changes the equation much.
  • eesmith 2y ago
    Where is the line where you say "stop"? People started complaining about cameras, and airport id checks, and facial recognition, and REAL ID, and incentives like PreCheck to support mass fingerprinting for a decade or three. At some point the rubber band breaks, or at least one of the ropes snap.
    • chao- 2y ago
      For those of us that don't follow your train of logic, can you explain what it means for "the rubber band to break" or for "one of the ropes to snap"? Is there something specific you have in mind? Or is this a vague foreboding sense that something, somewhere will eventually go wrong?
      • consteval 2y ago
        The problem with all these happenings is you're relying on the benevolence of our government. I would really prefer to not be beholden to how benevolent the government is feeling. For example, President Elect Trump has plans to reinstate Schedule F and require loyalty tests for all government employees. If you post liberal content on your facebook, or maybe you fail the test even once, boom - you can't get a government job ever, because your face and identity is linked to your political leanings and those political leanings are now the Enemy of the American Government. Or you could use this technology to automatically sort people, putting the ethnically-vague looking people into camps while they await rulings to see if they're illegal or not. Of course this is all extreme, like fascist extreme. Suppose this doesn't come true, which is what we're all hoping for. Are you confident there will never be an evil government from now until the end of time? If your answer is anything other than a resounding yes, then you should be opposed to these advancements on principal.
• Animats 2y ago
  Senators should not be complaining about this. Congress required the TSA to check identity, and soon, REAL ID will be required to fly in the US, even domestically. So what's their problem with doing it effectively?
  • semiquaver 2y ago
    > REAL ID will be required to fly I’ll believe it when I see it. Something like six “final deadlines” have passed for this to happen, and every time it’s kicked years down the road. It’s an unfounded mandate with real end-user costs (in my state an REAL ID costs twice as much to obtain) that no longer seems to have a base of support in Congress.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• paxys 2y ago
  So a bipartisan group of Senators can write a letter to the TSA speaking out against a policy but not get themselves to bring it to the floor and vote against it? Which is, you know, their actual job? Hard to think of their intentions as anything more than theater for their voter base.
  • akira2501 2y ago
    You write a letter and hopefully that solves it. You then hold a committee meeting and hopefully that solves it. You finally change federal law and usually that solves it. If it doesn't you have to start arresting people to foment change. This is not a gentle tool.
    • K0HAX 2y ago
      Being subtle never works.
      • akira2501 2y ago
        Of course it does. There are thousands of documented examples of this precise process working and producing good results. Government _is_ the people. It's inappropriate to use it as a tool to bully the people.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• to-too-two 2y ago
  I can’t believe it has gone this far. I was flying out of Logan airport (Boston) and had to have my face scanned right boarded the plane. There was nothing about opting out. It seemed like I didn’t comply, I wasn’t flying. I hate this. Feels so wrong and dystopian. They need to abolish this. It’s so unnecessary.
  • onetokeoverthe 2y ago
    They're not going to put up a sign about opting out. You have to say no.
    • zekrioca 2y ago
      Some flight agents kinda force it on passengers, specially JetBlue ones. They say it is ‘mandatory’, but in reality they do not know or ignore their own protocols.
    • kyawzazaw 2y ago
      they do put up a sign. saw in DCA, AUS, BOS
• shaboinkin 2y ago
  What I find funny about their sign that says “your photo will be deleted”, it fails to specify how many memcpy’s of the bits making up the photo have been made and if they made any detours along to the way to various other software systems that may save those bits across various disks. Does “your photo will be deleted” mean ALL bits making up the photo across any systems are wiped from all records? I doubt it. I also doubt if a database lookup is done on premise on closed networked systems with no possible ways to connect to the outside world.
• nonameiguess 2y ago
  Lots of comments come up here every time TSA facial recognition makes the front page asking what the difference is between this and the human looking at your ID. The answer is what happens when you don't match. I have long hair and a beard in my driver's license photo. I don't now. The license I had before I was able to renew without ever having to go in person for 15 years because of holes in California's laws about renewing driver's licenses remotely for anyone who has ever served on active duty military out of state. I have very rarely had a driver's license photo that actually looked like me, and TSA agents have commented on it pretty frequently, saying I don't look like the person on the ID I'm presenting. They let me through anyway, because what else are they supposed to do? Identification cards are in and of themselves somewhat of an element of security theater in that sense. The data are frozen in time whereas reality may constantly change. The only reason this was ever the case was the fact that your identification photo was not regularly updated to match your current face. If the TSA is constantly taking more photos of you, then potentially it can be. The obvious next phase in a program like this is to store the photos and build a current and updateable model of what every person in the US looks like, eventually not needing the ID cards at all.