Slashdot Mirror
Germany Begins Iris Scans at Frankfurt Airport
securitas writes "Deutsche Welle reports that at Germany's Frankfurt airport biometric iris scans of airline passengers have begun. The German government says that the six-month pilot project is part of Europe's 18-country Automated and Biometrics-based Border Checks initiative to improve 'border control routines' and domestic security, with a full-scale system to follow. The system uses an iris scan embedded in a passenger's machine-readable passport, which is compared to the passenger's iris with an onsite scan. Travelers must 'sign a data security document' and agree to be checked by border guards. The article also references the capability of an iris scan to determine drug and alcohol consumption. The European Parliament is considering replacing all of its traditional passports with a new European biometric passport by 2005. The IRISPASS system (press release) was built by Byometric systems, Iridian and Oki Electric Industry. More coverage at CNet/ZDNet, AP/USA Today and mirrors at AJC, and CNN."
greasy, dirty or peeling skin on the finger can easily distort fingerprint-recognition, a factor that plays no role in the case of iris-recognition.
So, does this mean that folks with melanomas of the iris, cataracts, macular degeneration (which is common and can manifest initially through pigment changes in the iris), etc... will have to go through a bigger hassle than the other passengers when traveling?
Also, since the iris does change throughout life, I would guess that one would have to renew their iris scan on their passport from time to time.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I fear a bleak future run along the lines of Minority Report's eye scanning. Honestly, this technology is scary.
...who is this "Iris?" Was she clothed when she was scanned and, most importantly is she seeing anyone?
Mr. T pitied this fool on 27 July 1992.
Honestly, this technology is scary.
I think that has probably been said by someone about pretty much every technology we use today. It isn't the technology that's scary, it's what people might do with it. Almost every new technology has the potential for good, as well as evil.
You probably shouldn't click this.
*Gets to work on iris creation and replacement machine* *Puts away fake (novel) ID machine*
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
At least they aren't Frankfurt scanning.
My dad always thought that the best security meassure for these iris scans would be some sort of icepick-like tip that pokes you hard in the eye if the scan fails.
Oh, it's all for the security of the United States. there is the pressure from. The next time a terrorist group attacks Manhattan, we will know a little bit more about these guys, their biometrical data. To look someone in the eyes is very important for psychologial reasons. Eyes don't lie :-)
My tin foil contact lenses will put a stop to that nonsense.
...I blame Ashcroft.
taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
Excuse me, just because something the german's do is something you don't agree with you call them Nazi's? EXCUSE ME?
Right now our own [US] government is a lot more like the Dritten Reich than the current german government.
As far as many europeans I know this doesn't bother them, because it's not more invasive than many other things that happen over there.
Be careful about throwing around the "Nazi" term - it may offend some of us around for many reasons, especially when it's inappropraitely and racistly used like you just did.
If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!
So you get a passport made with a fake iris scan, just like you would get one with a fake photo.
Or would it cryptographically check with a central office to make sure the passport iris scan is the same one you got when you applied for the passport? Whole other can of worms...
Wah!
What about using colored contact lenses to change identities. The only way to make brown eyes look blue is with a fake iris. A less suspicious person gets a passport wearing a pair of these and then gives that pair of contacts to another less-reputable person. I wonder if German authorities would even look twice at a nice artificially blond, artificially blue-eyed disguised terrorist.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Amsterdam Airport Schiphol introduced iris scanning in 2002
o l.security/
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/03/27/schiph
Germans collecting bilogical data about everyone who comes through their borders...what could go wrong?
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I would think the scan will have to be renewed on a fairly regular basis.
Still, this leaves me wondering. We hear a lot of negative stuff about universal ID cards of one stripe or another (I won't go so far as to call it FUD, it may be quite reasonable). Most of the cautions expressed seem to revolve around duplication / forgery by criminals etc.
Anyone have any info on how hard it would be to fool an iris (or retina) scanner? Might be a good substitute for universal IDs. I mean, the ostensible principles of univeral IDs aren't all bad...
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Furthermore, the iris doesn't just betray the identity of the passenger, but can also tell much about his or her possible drug and alcohol consumption.
Cuff him, the computer says he might be high!
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
This is rather invasive and doesn't bode well for privacy. Not to mention the issues of being able to get the same scan every time (eye damage, anyone?). On the other hand, it does make an attempt to solve the authentication problem -- how do you know that the person holding the passport is the person the password was issued to? Take a sample of data points from the scan at the time of application which are guaranteed to be reproducible (the signature) and sign it against a government-held private key. Barring changes in the eye structure, this should be easily reproducible.
Still, all these methods do nothing to prevent terrorism. They only validate that the person shoving their eye into the reader, terrorist or innocent, matches with the passport. Done properly, it should be incredibly difficult to forge a passport without having someone high up on the inside with access to the private encryption key. But it won't stop terrorists.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
What about the blind? People who use colored or distorted contacts (IE shaded contacts, contacts with designs on them), or other abnormalities of the eye. There might be a lot of ways people could potentially bypass a system like that.
Its only a matter of time before walking out your door requires a biometric scan. It is preposterous that we as free people of the world allow ourselves to be subjected to this for the sake of "security". This is like any other "protective" measure. It screws over the decent people of the earth and does nothing to the criminals. GUN LAWS DONT KEEP GUNS OUT OF CRIMINAL HANDS! All the terrorists and bad guys are gonna do now is sneak into countries without flying to them directly. Or the terrorists will recruit people inside of countries they dont like. You dont stop bad guys by telling them to stop. You MAKE the BAD GUYS stop. Leave joe-shmoe's rights alone.
All transactions are electronic. Think "Credits" in "Total Recall".
All movement is scanned. Think eye scanning in "Minority Report".
All new information is copyrighted, and DRM free info is exchanged amongs the population like drugs are today. Think "Matrix" where Neo gets his little disks for cash, before he goes and follows the White Rabbit.
All information is put together in a database, where the Government can search it at will, without a warrent. Think "198..." scratch that. Think "2004", TIA project, Echelon, Patriot Act I, Patriot Act II, Patriot Act III (comming soon to a Democracy near you) et. al.
FUN!
...start using operatives who have no eyes. And then what will we do?
With each new device or method used in airports to catch or filter out terrorists, the barrier to commit terrorist acts is raised higher. What do you think will happen when it becomes virtually impossible to do anything even remotely odd near or inside airports and airplanes? well I'll tell you : terrorists will fall back on easier targets, chiefly trains. And then, once a train has been derailled, every government will start applying airport police-state methods to railway stations and trains, and so on ...
It's an endless battle. If countries carries on trying to defend themselves like they do now (mostly in the US, but also in other countries), they'll all turn into huge menacing police states. and terrorists will have won. If those countries don't defend themselves, terrorists will blow things up forever and will have won again.
What the world really needs is a true force of education in dangerous countries, a project that spans over 2 or 3 generations. The US is in Afghanistan and Iraq, why don't they set up schools to teach the current generation of kids there not to hate, and why terrorism is bad? They're not doing jack squat, and neither are any other countries concerned by terrorist threats. Instead of starting to implement that long-term, but only real solution to the terrorist problem, they barricade themselves and make life miserable for their own populations.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
I actually worked with Iridian back when they were called "Iriscan" a few years ago. The technology was pretty cool; unlike fingerprint or voiceprints, which can only verify someone's identity after they tell you (via a username, prox card, etc) who they are, an iris scan can actually identify a user based off of their iris pattern.
A typical fingerprint has about 10 points that can be uniquely identified, and on a thumbprint scanner you're lucky to get 5 or 6 of them reliably. The iris has roughly 26 unique points that can be picked up every time. Back when I was working with Iridian's stuff they used a low light video camera to basically take a picture of your eye...no funky lasers or anything like that. Additionally, and perhaps morbidly so, they had built technology to help identify if the eye was live or not, so not only could you not just hold up a picture of an eye, but you couldn't take someone else's eye (a la Demolition Man, I believe) and hold it up to the scanner.
Additionally, the iris pattern (and thumbprint or voiceprint in other applications) is never held as an actual pattern; it's just a hash based off of what comes off the scanner, so privacy was not much of a concern.
It's "no one," not "noone." Who the hell is noone anyway?
this poor kid wasn't born in Germany.
What?
Also, Keratoconus is a disease that causes the cornea to deform. This would cause scans of your iris to change. Also, people with this often have cornea transplants. The stitches (which are sometimes left in "forever") are right over the iris.
If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.
What good is comparing an iris scan to information on the passport? It should be compared against a central database. At some point the system used to place the information on the passport will be cracked - either by hacking or theft. Criminals or terrorists with the most money (Al Qaeda have had access to millions of $$ in the past) will be able to effectively bypass the system whilst the honest individual citizens are kept under the thumb by big brother.
I work for a private security company (can't give you the name) and we are looking into biometrics too.
They seem to work quite well. There is one "drawback" though: you can only use them to identify people who are already in your database. So it can only be used to authorize personel and not to identify visitors for example. This will remain like this until governements start keeping databases of biometric records.
Ofcourse this isn't very evident because the TTEI-resolution of 2001 specifically forbids practices like this on grounds of techfear I suppose.
I've always had a geeky dreamproject of supplementing my traditional lock and key entry to my house with biometric security devices. The idea being that in the event of a systems failure, instead of being locked out of the house I could fall back to the old lock-n-key method.
My idea would be to use either iris-scanning, breath analyzation or some combination of the two (ideally a choice so that if one were to fail, say the iris, the breath analyzer would let you in). Much more efficient than fumbling around for keys in the dark! And a blessing to the drunken Irishman I can sometimes be (not all, but SOME stereotypes certainly hold more than a little water...and occasionally some whiskey too!) I digress.
But the last time I checked, (this was a few years ago) such devices were not so readily available. And when you could find them they were exorbitantly expensive. Insult to injury drivers were only available for NT. Not that it would be that terrible to set up an NT box for this purpose, but Linux of course would be much preferable.
So my question is, has this situation changed? Has the price of this technology become more available and affordable? Still prohibitively expensive? Any sourceforgian opensource driver alternative for the devices that are?
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Hmm... sounds like a job for strong encryption. I was thinking more of a database, though... and the security issues there are frightening. Hell, just the *stupidity* issues there are frightening!
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Er, given that every foreign national must now have their fingerprints and photograph taken when entering the USA, I don't think you have much of a vantage point for your pulpit...
Personally I object to both. I've never been a criminal, and don't see why I should be treated like one. The sad thing is that the UK are heading towards ID cards (completely useless) as well. Oh but you won't have to show them on demand, just present them at a police station within 7 days... As if there's a difference...
Simon.
Physicists get Hadrons!
In France and Belgium, for example, you can walk into a police station and declare you have lost your passports (the prevalence of muggers and pickpockets makes it an easily believable story). You have to provide a birth certificate. What is it? An ordinary piece of paper, incredibly easy to counterfeit. Once your ID has been "established" by this "proof", the authorities will issue a new set of ID documents: forgery-proof ID and biometric passport. With your supplied name and photo on it.
If at least, they keep a database of iris scans, forgers would be able to do it only once. The article doesn't say anything about such a database.
So this is a nice strong link in the othewise very weak security chain in Europe.
--
Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/
Does having an "arresting station" in one's own dwelling-place not sound a bit more chilling that eye-scanning?
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
I did not here a beep about this here in Germany, I guess the plan is to introuce the system through the backdoor.
Well, maybe, but than they wouldn't make a press release, right?
Ah! I was wondering why those Germans in Germany were scanning passengers in a German airport as part of a European initiative. Turns out it's to secure the United States!
No, but the whole rush towards biometric data in passports was triggered not least by the US, as pointed out in the USAtoday article linked in the story:
"Germany passed laws after Sept. 11 attacks that provide for biometric features to be added to passports and personal identity papers. Post-Sept. 11 U.S. legislation also requires 27 countries, mostly in Europe, to add biometrics to passports they issue after Oct. 26, 2004, or else have their citizens apply for visas. "
wake me when they come for me.
-pyrrho
The whole biometrics discussion only became more
than a stupid idea after the 9th September. I
guess everyone knows by now that the
terrorists lived and studied in Germany before
thay attacked the world trade center (or some
of them, i forgot). But the point is, that
they haven't shown any suspicious behaviour
before their attack.
So most sane people have argued that the
problem wasn't identifying the terrorists, for
which this would be a possible solution. The
problem is to know who is a terrorist,
criminal etc while their actions still lie in
the future. Obviuosly this problem is not
solved at all.
The government is simply using this as a placebo
to soothe the fear of terrorism in the
gullible general public and as a neat side
effect they increase their control over people. imho of course
the most sexp i get is my paren-mode.
As it seems, most of you might have missed the fact, that the system is optional. You don't have to use it, you don't have to own a special passport if you don't want to use it.
It's setup as a convenience for frequent travellers. Its opt-in, if you would like to call it that way.
Okay... so they begin doing iris scans. That's great.
Now Mr. John Q. Terrorist gets on the plane and hijacks it, sending 150 people crashing to their death in the sea. HE'S FRIGGIN' DEAD. Who cares what his biometrics are?
Two months later, another terrorist boards a plane and hijacks it. Oh, GOOD. They got his iris scan! The world will be safe!!!
I'm sorry, but I don't know of many suicide terrorists that strike twice.
Oh, and if you want to comment on how this isn't about terrorism and is more about catching known criminals, etc.... again... what does it matter? Their iris scans aren't on file anywhere else... and if they're really a criminal considering travelling overseas or even internationally, I *think* they would have the sense enough to utilize false documents.
There are other ways of travelling.
I fail to see what this will solve or even help.
The German authorities will not be able to enforce this system for a long time, as it is impossible to force all other countries to provide such data.
Besides, did you ever notice that Europeans have to provide biometric information when applying for a US visa?
Sebastian
This technology will never be applicable for identification from a database because of the base rate fallacy: i.e.
assuming that if a person is corretly identified 99.999% of the time. if there are 500M (roughly all of europe) people in the database, then the mistake rate would be approximately 500 ppl. So for every individual going through, there are 500 possible individuals which he could be. This is not even the full application of the base rate fallacy, there is not enough research published on iris recognition for it to be fully analized (this is a *very* rough estimate).
*this does make alot of sense for a passport comparator, b/c no one could then steal a passport and use it, unless they want to take the risk of prison on a single hand of poker: with only a royal flush being the way to win (roughly equivalent odds as getting through with some else's passport).
Which means that you can only be tracked IF:
The passport has a chip in it with your personal information upon it, and that information (after a verification of your iris) is sent to a data mining facility. No other means of tracking is possible.
-big brother is not watching you, he keeping your attention every moment of every day; making sure that you never think about anything except what he tells you to think. Making sure that you never feel anything that he doesnt tell you to feel.
"this is the gloaming"
radiohead
IMHO it's doubtful if this will change anything in the effective security level. - A number of convicted terrorists were native citizens of non-listed non-suspicious countries or naturalized there, with legal passports.
An even bigger number were from a suspicious country with legal papers, which were certified by U.S. officials, including visa and so on.
To me it seems that the main problem of people with invalid or forged papers is that they are just economic refugees, having not even enough money for proper papers.
Too few money does not seem to be the primary problem of today's terrorists. At least not of those who I heard of.
Never, the thing you seem to remember is a statement to the effect that the tactics Bush is using are eerie similar to the tactics Hitler was using.
And if you think that statement is not true you might want to get a good history book some time.
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
This is tangential at best. 9 years ago, I was on a college trip to Moscow that included a several-hour layover in Frankfurt. To get to the food areas, we had to go through customs. Absolutely starved and desperate to try a McDonald's that sold beer, several of us went through Customs together.
As the agent patted me down, which he did to everyone, he actually grabbed my crotch. Apparently this was a standard part of the pat-down, but it was news to me. Shocked, I blurted out the first word of German which came to mind: "Danke!" I turned eight shades of purple and we all laughed, then they let me through.
Black Hat gets on plane with faked ID and iris scan; knows the airport screener in Frankfurt is better then the one he left behind in Cyprus. Quick trip to the WC past the harried and underpaid seward, a quickly passed 500 Euro and.... Graft corruption, bribery greed these are the same as they always have been. All these security checks do is placate the cattle. The wolves still feast on the fringes of the herd and occasionally attack the middle. Menwhile, the sheepherd gently leads the rest of us towards the slaughterhouse...
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
You want to treat me like a criminal then why should I spend my money in your country?
I have this thing, more than a thing, really; more of a screaming, frothing refusal to submit to fingerprinting, retinal scanning, DNA sampling, gait analysis, random drug testing, ID picture taking... I don't think I should have to unless I am arrested and accused of a crime (and I better see a judge and a lawyer, too -- no torture pit in Syria, please).
I understand that pasports are necessary, and I would submit to good old picture ID, of course. Seems to have worked for a very long time. I do detest having to state various things about my private life (are you married? divorced? where's your wife? A: why the hell is that your business?).
The 40 or so hijackers that crashed the jets were here on perfectly valid ID's. No biometric scanning would have made a difference.
So, why are we submitting to this crap? And do you think that the powerful in the U.S. will be ducking their heads into retinal readers when they travel? Do you think the Saudi royals will?
Do you think they will stop at retinas? DNA will follow. Then RFID tags to track us. All in the name of Safety. Although none of these things will stop criminals from blowing something up. They merely have to keep their noses clean until they attack.
Now, I know that I am unemployable in corporate America now and forever, for they operate in some realm other than constitutional democracy. I don't grant them the right to make me pee on command, or track my private life (they can fire you for going to a union organizing meeting on your own time -- ruling was upheld).
But this -- I'm not going to guess, I am going to state that very soon I am locked out of Europe. And if the U.S. follows the EU's lead, I won't be able to leave the United States because I would refuse to have my biometric data taken for a passport?
I'm never able to travel out of the U.S. unless I submit. They won't let me leave.
I'm in prison. We all are.
especially considering the treatment the Roma's regularly receive in Europe, not just Germany either, denied citizenship anywhere, their childeren deneied schooling and the same treatment any other kids born in the country to non-citizens. As for the US we are currently so close to treating those of Arab descent as criminals just as we did such a DIS-SERVICE to the Japanease in WW2....We are not in any position to start throwing many stones, with non-citizens sitting in internment camps in Guantanamo Bay, never charged, denied any of the BASIC human rights we so LOUDLY TOUT...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
the U.S. is far less likely to repeat slavery (or Native American genocide), than Germany is to oppress its Turkish or other minorities
I think entirely the opposite is true - due precisely to their country's history, the German people are far less likely to oppress or otherwhise mistreat ethnic minorities than other countries (i.e. the US).
Germans suffer greatly under an (often subconscious) apprehension over how they appear to be treating other cultures. Germany is much more likely than most countries to be scrutinised for it's actions concerning minorities, for as soon it makes a controvesial move there will instantly be cries about how it is reverting to form. Austria elects a right-wing government and no-one blinks an eye, Germany has the world's eye upon them and thus adopts a far less forceful approach in it's international relations.
To be frank, Germans have a much more tolerant and open-minded view towards foreigners than most Americans - and I've never heard anyone refer to the Gastarbeiter as "Germany's Niggers". The comparison is apt only in the sense that both groups are one of largest minorities in their respective countries - at least virtually all african-americans speak English. This is getting off topic, but the problem with the Turkish peoples in Germany lies in equal parts with them and us. Some have a tendency to form enclaves and refuse to assimilate or even learn German. When you walk down streets where every shop sign is both in German and Turkish (except for the pub/social club, which is just in Turkish), all the kids on the street are Turks, and nary a word of German is spoken between the teenagers on street corners, you wonder whether the Regierung (Government) might not have a case for denying citizenships to those who aren't making an effort to become part of the German community.
Unlike in 1935, the German government of today (for all their flaws) makes plenty of effort to try and integrate the immigrants currently living here into mainstream society. Stronger border controls just mean they can focus on the problem at hand, rather than having a growing pool of people who have to be adressed.
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
Before I go into my shtick, a couple of puns and punlike semantic constructions. My apologies, some of them are horrible.
- Won't this be a problem for eyedentical twins?
- Your passport Mister Willard. "Eye don't think so!"
- Rods? Cones? Where the hell is my luggage?
- Sir, can you remove any loose change from your eyelids...
- Sorry maam, your scan keeps coming up "Grape Juice $2.95."
And an airline joke or two off the cuff...
1. Thank you for flying Air Lingus. Oh no, THANK YOU!
2. Will you be smoking or non-smoking Herr Schrodinger?
3.
Okay, now to the schtick.
Yes, isn't it wonderful. At last something macabre and frighteningly science-fictioney is crossing over into our lives, citizens. At last we can unite in glory, as one. Travel is a very cautious affair, citizens. I ask you, should we not take every possible precaution?
So you see.
There is no deriding this measure, my fellows.
It follows then, that we should adopt a similar solidarity in our daily lives. We are one body. We are one, whole, together.
The 21st century is here! Let's do the 21st Century Cheer!
DNA!
DNA!
Nanobots! Nanobots!
DNA!
Siss Boom Bah!
Gat Ta Ca!
Iris scans! Cyberspace!
Siss Boom Bah!
Human clones!
Reality shows!
Dick Clarke's corpse is still alive!
Human clones!
Martian brine!
GMO wine!
The spice must flow! We rule the soul!
We're free, cool, and fine!
Terror War!
What's it for?
Raining death from outer space!
Terror War!
Woohoo! We love you Twenty First Century!! Big kiss! Mmmwwwahh!
-- thinkyhead software and media