Slashdot Mirror
Northwest Airlines Wants Eye-Scan Check-in
Headius writes: "According to the Associated Press, Northwest Airlines is testing out a check-in system that uses eye scans to identify customers, and provide a faster way to check in. The article is here locally, and probably making its way to other news sites as well." Bruce Schneier posted a while ago this neat summary of some of the limitations of biometrics, worth re-reading. One question I have, how long will you eyes stay on record?
All it would do is be more invasive into our lives..
Wont prevent a damned thing, unless your ticket is stolen..
Ya know, most HIjackers do buy their tickets, and show proper ID at the gate..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I assume they scan your eyes first time, and it stays in their database forever. It'd be rather useless if they scanned you, then got rid of the record, since the point is to let trusted passengers go through.
Seems to me the major problem is that a terrorist need only establish themself as "trusted" - fly on a few flights without problems, be nice and courteous and look non-suspicious. Once you're trusted you've got essentially free range - just walk through with only an eye scan.
Boom.
See? it's the wave of the future! It's even in the movies
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
The questions I always had about retinal scans is what happens in the situation of someone who has a glass eye?
Do the scans ignore it, or do they try to recognize it as a real eye? If so, does it pass or fail the system?? I imagine it would fail, since there is no retina to scan.
And what happens when they change their glass eye to a new one, that might be slightly different looking; would they no longer be recognized as the same person?
If anyone knows, please respond, I'm curious!
Obviously, eye-scans will help to identify one-eyed, ex-Taleban Head of State and Bin Laden buddy Mullah Mohammed Omar, and prevent him boarding Northwest Airlines flights.
I mean, if airlines wan't increased security of any sort.. people tend to agree, or at least not too strongly disagree, after all, we need our airplanes to be safe, right? Oh wait, yeah, except for the terrible incidents on Sept. 11th, THEY ARE. And it's not likely something of that nature could happen again.
Those animals didn't use guns or weapons smuggled onboard, they weren't some kind of secret spy martial arts experts...
They just used fear.
My problem is this: Flying is a needed method of travel. You can't very well avoid it if you have to travel. So, let's see.. I have a right to privacy as long as I don't want to travel anywhere?
It doesn't add up. If things like this keep happening, eventually it will be on trains, city busses, and tollbooths on our highways.
WHO I AM is not important when I travel on an airplane. Whether or not I'm carrying weapons, bombs, that is important.
it says a faster way for it's frequent flyers to get through security.
Last time I flew on an airline...
I a) Walked to the security gate (X-ray machine, metal detector, etcetera). I put my carryon bags in the machine, walked through the detector, which beeped. A girl waved a wand around to verify that it was my belt buckle that set off the detector, I grabbed my bags, and went on my way.
How, exactly, is having me do an eye scan going to speed up my going through security? They can't be permitting anyone into the secure area without going through this process.. can they? If they are, that makes security WORSE, not better. But there's now ay they are doing that..
So how is this going to make it 'more secure'.. given that you shouldn't have to identify yourslef to fly anyway?
Free Mac Mini
Weapons on a plane are dangerous, you have thousands of lbs of fuel all over the place, control wires and computers all over and a pressure sealed cabin. An errant bullet could be catastropic. Soldiers aren't a magical toy that makes everything bad go away.
Any fight in a confined area becomes very lethal very fast. Currently if there is a distirbance without weapons, other passengers may subdue the offender, bumps bruises, no deaths.
With weapons, you will get serious injuries or deaths from the same incident.
On a longer flights (10+ hours) you want the pilots not to eat, drink or go to the bathroom? This just isn't practical.
Terrorists will just hire someone to swap out their eyes for them. They just have to keep the bandages on for 12 hours afterwards, or they'll go blind.
Automated system: "Welcome onboard and have a safe flight, Mr. Yakimoto!"
Do contact lenses interfere with this technology in any way?
These technologies are dangerous to us whether they work or they fail.
We are afraid of being attacked by uniformed thugs at airports and soon, bus stations and shopping malls because the biometric system came up with yet another false positive. Like to be mistaken for bin Laden and have your shopping trip be interrupted by a SWAT team?
We are concerned about our privacy being invaded (ever been stalked?) for personal or political reasons. America is now a land where the government can take anyone, declare that person a "terrorist", and detain that person indefinitely without a trial or even an attorney. Should we want that government to know where we are at all times?
We are concerned because we know that this stuff is NOT ready for prime time but is being sold to PHB types who can easily be scammed and to journalists who don't have the tech skills or knowledge to be know when they're being snowed as a "solution" to protect us from terrorists and criminals. The biometrics companies aren't doing this out of interest in public safety, they are doing this in hopes of an IPO and a quick cash-out..
Which category do you fall into? PHB? Tech-illiterate journalist? Or are you a shill for a biometrics company?
Easy ways to defeat biometrics
Face/iris scanner failures.
Tech Public Policy stuff