Traveling this summer? Maybe don’t let the airport scan your face.
Traveling this summer? Maybe don’t let the airport scan your face.
You have the right to opt out of facial recognition tech. Here’s how.
- Travelers can opt out of facial recognition at US airports by requesting manual ID verification, though resistance or intimidation may occur.
- Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches, misidentification, and normalization of surveillance.
- The Algorithmic Justice League's "Freedom Flyers" campaign aims to raise awareness of these issues and encourage passengers to exercise their right to opt out.
Stupid privacy people. What's the worst that could happen? A fascist coming into power next year who could misuse the data?
Minority Report
Stupid privacy people. What's the worst that could happen? Surveillance companies that have already scoured the internet for photos of people to build a giant database of people?
It's also not like they could ever use the hundreds of other cameras all over the airports. What would they do with all that data anyways?
I'm going to assume they can photgraph you the moment you walk into the airport.
I used to be extra during the TSA body scan BS. And honestly, I felt like they won.
They'll always win because they can just prevent you from flying.
They pulled me in a private room when I refused to body scan and my bag was suspicious.
It was an extra 25 minutes. Enough to be inconvenient as they tried to find two available TSA agents willing to body check me then check every single item in my suitcase.
That's the fun part about the war for privacy. We have already lost and if you make a big deal about it they're just going to make your life hell!
It's not such a binary thing as winning or losing, it's a constantly shifting process. The only way to actually lose is by giving up -- instead, consider it making it as hard as possible for your privacy to be infringed upon. Sometimes it's more inconvenient, but what makes us such a farmable populace is our reluctance to be inconvenienced. Be good at being uncomfortable.
And we lost it under W and the patriot act.
I tried to refuse the face scan and they looked at me like I just grew eye stalks. After a long pause, I said never mind I need to catch this flight, let's do it.
It's not a hill I'm willing to die on, even though I'm disappointed with the practice.
I refused, it went fine. I had to repeat myself because it was unexpected and dudebro wasn't prepared, and they had to turn on the other machine and wait for it to start up, but it only delayed me like 2 minutes. The more people ask, the easier it gets.
I still opt out of those scans to this day. Why stop?
I’m okay with the TSA scan (pre-check) since.. you know.. they already have you if you took a picture for your ID.
Those “clear” people however. Who TF thinks it’s a good idea to hand your biometric info to a corp?
Clear is now a TSA “vendor” for the precheck process. The machines they use for the sign up process - at least the airport I was at - don’t have the eye scanning camera in the kiosk.
The Clear representative I was asking questions of had said they don’t require eye scans for Clear, though that is the default. People can ask to use just fingerprints, which he said does disrupt the terminal process as the agents don’t think to ask if fingerprints were what was registered when the eye scans fail.
I am not advocating for Clear. I refuse to use them. I simply do want to call out that they are one of 3 who handle the process for the TSA now. People do have a choice of which of the three to use.
There's no way my ID photo would work for facial recognition. I don't plan on giving them anything new before I'm forced to
Brit here. About eight years ago I flew from London to Belfast and return for business. We don't need a passport to travel to Northern Ireland, just photo id like driving licence is fine.
Coming back to London I approached the gate and before I could pull out my wallet to show my id, the guard says " Good evening Mr. Codandchips have a safe journey "....
Yes they have facial recognition, the cameras are visible but you don't notice them.
Sounds fishy to me.
Yeah, they didn't know he is Mr. Codanchips @lemmy.world?
It isn't necessarily. Had a police officer greet me by name once (had never interacted with this officer or the station they were from). They'll have the data necessary to identify you by sight. If you're a British citizen the British government most likely has a photo of you somewhere if you have any photo ID, not to mention if your face is known to the state through other means eg through interaction with the criminal justice system.
Good God, were you that security guard???
For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, [with some exceptions]
I had no idea we were already at that point.
always wanted to visit the US. I guess that won't happen then.
I refuse to participate in this dystopia. But I'm a little worried this will make me a recluse
Trust me you're already a recluse relative to most by being on here. If you observe what passes for a "normal" "person" these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think. They are gone.
But once you stop worrying that you may be saying no to experiences too much purely on principle, then you're free to go even further and eradicate surveillance capitalism influence from your life altogether. One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.
If you observe what passes for a "normal" "person" these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think.
Can you just like, not be so damn condescending and elitist? Literally saying people who use TikTok and purchase stuff from Temu are sub-human...
Opt out. If we don't exercise our rights, we lose them.
"What if they retaliate and make life difficult for me? "
That's both illegal and against policy. If someone delays your right to travel for this specific reason, delay their job by asking for their supervisor and their name and employee number. Then file a complaint. That will dissuade that public servant (and their leadership) from exhibiting such behavior and encouraging it respectively.
"But they are capturing your image in 10 skillion other public locations."
- Sure, and you have the option to create your own privacy in public.
- Further, what's the real purpose of the scanner at the TSA check if they already have that detailed image of your retina, your facial pore patterns and whatever the fsck else they store? They don't have that level of detail yet on CCTV.
If you don't care, then that's fine. Some people don't mind the slow encroachments on 4th Amendment protections. Cool. Others do. Cool also. That's why we can opt out.
There should exist a law that orders privacy by default forcing all this intrusive stuff to bi opt-in instead of opt-out. With data, it is often to late if it is only opt-out..
Agreed. This was rolled out without any regard whatsoever for people's interest in data privacy. That kind of entitled behavior from any government agency is just plain gross.
I figure that by being in the airport there's enough footage of my face from security cameras that I didn't consent to (other than by being in public) that the scan of my face while boarding is moot.
Opting out of this face scan in particular is like using Chrome to browse the web, but searching with DuckDuckGo "for privacy reasons"
There's probably a huge difference in resolution.
There is a reason I wear a large hat and a mask when walking through the airport and generally keep my head tilted down. I also wear large sunglasses, but that's as much because every airport has at least one giant wall that is nothing but glass and inevitably I will walk around a corner and get face fucked by the sun. The privacy is just a bonus 😅
If you already have a passport and opt out of facial recognition, you're only deluding yourself into a false sense of privacy. In fact, if you enter the screening area at all in an airport, you are kidding yourself if you think you can maintain some semblance of privacy. The government knows what you look like. Calm down and move on with your life.
Fuck calming down. That's how we got into this mess in the first place. People are to complacent with privacy. Anyone that thinks this attitude won't lead to terrible things is a fool.
won’t lead
I would say we are already seeing / have already seen bad things happening because of this complacency. Buf of course worse things will happen if we don't take measures.
The reality is that the ship for that kind of privacy has shipped a long time ago. Like a hundred years ago. The reality is that the authorities know details about every single person that passes through an airport. You can't get in or out without a passport/identification.
There is virtually no expectation to privacy at an airport. It's a public place that is heavily monitored for good reason. And that fact isn't hidden in the slightest. You are legally required to freely and honestly identify yourself to the authorities.
If this was at your local bus stop, then you'd have a point. But not at airports.
Also, the serious discussion about privacy should have started with the introduction of the smartphone. That's when the conversation would have mattered and made a difference. But that ship has sailed.
I went vacationing in another country and it was kinda uncomfortable being scanned by cameras, then scanning my passport, then moving across country lines and getting cameras and another scanning of my passport.
I did this during an international trip last year coming back into the country. The guy mostly seemed confused and kind of suspicious, but it was nbd.
They will potentially take you out of line to a side room to hand you off to someone else. It seemed to be an area where they deal with any oddball kind of things. There was a lady ahead of me who was more raucus and upset about some issue with her ID. The guy who checked mine mainly seemed kind of bemused, like it was unusual.
Be prepared for "We have the biometric data from your photo already, why do you care?"
You're not obligated to give them a super detailed justification. Just remain polite and unconfrontational, and explain that you prefer not use the system as long as the right remains afforded to you to opt out.
(Note, this right only extends to US citizens)
Like I get it, it’s scary and I don’t want them to have my data, but my picture is being taken ALL the time basically everywhere I go. Is putting my foot down for this specific type really making a difference?
It's the only real way to push back that other folks will notice if enough of us do it.
Last time I went through DC a few weeks ago they were using these. I saw a sign saying you're welcome to opt out. Nobody even questioned what they were doing and were just going along. When it was my turn I politely said I'd rather not do the scan. Dude just glanced at my ID and waved me through. The next few folks behind me blinked and said they didn't want the scan either. If enough people push back it can at least maybe slow down the normalization of constant surveillance.
Put your foot down everywhere then -- it's a fallacy to think that it's not worth it to resist data harvesting because it already gets collected "everywhere" anyway, take one step at a time to make it harder and harder. Opting out of this is just one step.
I have global entry, so they already have my biometric data. I'd love to not here scanned, but this point it wouldn't be anything they didn't already have.
"Normies" avoiding scanning their face is useless because the vast majority of them still use Instagram and other social media services full of surveillance
I've never posted any pictures of my face online. But I'm sure many data brokers have them. And some family members many years ago I'm sure posted some.
The game was lost for me when I started getting fingerprinted at certain airports. This privilege used to be reserved for suspected criminals. Now we're are all suspected criminals on a default setting.
It's about normalizing survellience, and the article also says this as an opinion further down in the text.
Everyone can see that we are going towards the society in black mirror, with social scores, and people being punished for not complying with rules of any kind. I'm glad I'm kind of old because the future will suck.
I find stupid to give away my biometric data to everyone asking for it just because I gave it away once in exchange of my passport, but I guess that's just me.
The last time I flew they did this, but there was a huge sign that said photos are immediately deleted after verification...is this not true?
Just for example, that's an easy way to save just the biometric signature and have very few people question it.
Also, bureaucratic lies can be technically true. They copy the photo from the original device to a database, then delete the photo on the device. So it's technically true the photo was immediately deleted, it's just also copied and persisted forever. And a bureaucrat will proudly stand in front of you all day and tell you they deleted the photo, and they will sleep well that night with not any concern
It’s discussed in the article. We can’t really be sure if they do, but they already store the measurements of your face along with other bits of metadata. They could reconstruct your face with it even without the photo. It’s a deceptive claim, because even if they throw away the camera video they still have your face for all intents and purposes.
Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches,
I know you're using the acceptable legal term.
As a Cybersecurity person, the "potential" data breaches we talk about, today, are really pretty certain, at this point, in history.
We may work towards a collective genuine 'potential', where the breach might never happen, someday, with effort.
Turns chair around and sits straddling it like a cool youth mentor.
Y'alls faces at airports are definitely getting leaked on the dark web.
The good news is it might take enough years to leak that your appearance might happen to change in between.
You're already on hundreds of cameras by walking into any airport in the world. Do they need your consent to run facial recognition software on the security footage?
I used to work for a company that did various kinds of biometric recognition. I unfortunately was paraded past these cameras many times for testing purposes, so my face was compromised many moons ago.
We had two kinds of products we installed in airports. When looking at large crowds most airports wanted cameras that would monitor the flow of traffic, determining if there were any bottlenecks causing people to arrive at their gate (or baggage claim) after their luggage.
The other product was facial recognition for identification purposes. These are the machines you have to stand right next to. There are various legal reasons airports did not want to use any crowd-level cameras for identification. They hadn't obtained consent, but also, the low resolution per face would lead to many more false positives. It was also too costly.
But we did have high def cameras installed in strategic locations at large music halls. These private companies were less concerned with privacy and more concerned with keeping banned individuals out of their property. In those cases, we registered faces of people who were kicked out for various reasons and ignored all other faces.
My point I guess is twofold: first, you might not be facially tracked in as many places as you think you are. Second, eventually you will be and there's not a whole lot we can do to stop it. For many years, Target has identified people with their payment card, used facial recognition to detect when they return to the store, and used crowd tracking to see where in the store you go (and sometimes they have even changed ad displays based on the demographics of people standing nearby).
Mostly, you will be identified and tracked when there is financial incentive to do so.
Planes <<<<<< trains.
For distances >600km, flying is usually 4x-10x faster at a similar price. At least in and around Germany. I assume in the US trains compare way worse, also because the distances are way larger.
Examples: "Normal" example: Stuttgart (Germany) -> Amsterdam (Netherlands) Train: 11h 10min - 241€ Plane: 1h 20min - 225€
Best case scenario for train in Germany at around that distance (because there's a direct connection): München -> Berlin Train: 3h 54min - 167€ Plane: 1h 5min - 226€
You're too smart for this site. I too love taking trains across both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans!
I'd actually love to take some sort of sea train, underground tunnel or floating death wave train one day. It wouldn't be relaxing, peaceful, or cheap. But it would be an adventure.
Hour vs. hour it's the best form of transportation
You get more space, there's no TSA, you don't get charged for bringing luggage, you can carry on liquids, you get leg room, the wifi is decent.
But if I'm traveling a really far distance... For example, if I'm going from California to New York I'd rather go by plane. Going by train for that seems to be pretty horrible. America is in desperate need of a ground transportation that can get from California to New York quickly.
if I’m going from California to New York
Yup, that's like 70-80 hours, depending on where in CA you're leaving from. So you'll be on that train for 3 days, and have to change trains 2-4 times. The plus side is that it's cost-competitive w/ flying ($400-ish, vs $200-ish flying), but that's for coach, so you'd spend those 3 days sleeping in a chair. If you want a sleeper room, that's like $2k.
A direct flight would take 5-ish hours and cost $200-ish.
There's a reason nobody rides trains in the US, and it's because it takes way too long and it's too expensive. It would be a fun experience, but not great if you're using it for transportation.
They are very much incomparable more so than they are comparable. Try taking a train over a sea or across a country like the US.
Exactly. I live near SLC, and to get to SF would take:
- ~19 hours by train and cost $92 in coach
- ~11 hours by car - $60 in gas in my hybrid, $130 in my minivan
- ~2 hours by plane - <$50 by plane (Frontier)
And that's a route with a direct train connection, so literally no transfers. So, a train takes way longer, is probably more expensive (esp. if I take family), and I'd probably need a rental car on the other end. And that's for a "best case" scenario with direct train service.
Screw that, trains anywhere other than the east coast of the US makes pretty much no sense for transportation. As an experience, sure, but not to get from A to B.
Agreed, but they'll inevitably fuck those up too.
I went thru naturalization process. They have everything already. Including DNA, retina scan, etc. So I opted for Clear. Global Entry as well. They have it all already. May as well fast track going thru customs.
Clear is run by a 3rd party company. TSA pre-check is run by the government. TSA pre-check comes free with Global Entry, you just need to sign up for it.
Yeah I have pre because I have had global entry for a while (8 years now I think). Got clear because where I am, it changes wait time from 30 minutes to 5.
Dumbass article, if you go to an airport your face is all over the security cameras and the checkpoints delete your image immediately after scanning so they are the least of your worries.
the checkpoints delete your image immediately after scanning so they are the least of your worries.
I'm going to need a source on this bullshit lie.
Source: the signs on the device itself at an airport I saw last week, also the TSA website https://www.tsa.gov/digital-id
The photo is immediately deleted unless clear signage is posted ndicating that the checkpoint is undergoing testing as results may be retained for up to 24mo.
Poison pill their data instead.
-
Generate a person
-
Print it
-
Scan it when asked for facial data
Simply stand away from the camera or keep your face covered with a mask, present your ID, and say, “I opt out of biometrics. I want the standard verification process.”
This sounds like a great way for a SovCit to get a full ass inspection from a sausage-fingered security guard.
The best you're going to get is redirected to a very long queue of people who's passports don't have biometrics.
Actually no, they look at your face and your ID, make sure the information matches, and move you along. No secondary inspection, no difference except you didn't get scanned with facial recognition. It's the same process as before facial recognition was implemented.
Why even write that comment?
I refuse to go through the body scanners, but the last time I went through the airport there wasn’t anyone trying to opt-out. I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything, this won’t either.
I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything
You mean the backscatter X-ray units that have already been phased out 10 years ago?
The modern milimeter-wave scanners both do not reveal anything and do not use ionising radiation. If radiation is a concern to you, you really shouldn't be flying at all to be honest. The dose you get up there is much higher than you'd get from an X-ray scanner, although it is still negligible.
Reflectacles are a really good idea if you're going this route. They can ID you with just an eye scan, and this interferes with that.
They have you take your sunglasses off.
Get clear ones. Most (all?) of those security cameras use IR illumination to ID you, so you can have lenses that allow visible light through, but mess up IR scanning. I think you can get them w/ prescription lenses if you email the creator, so you can legitimately tell them you need your glasses to see (if you need a prescription, that is).
Interesting how addicted government is to collecting data.
she cute