British Airport Will Require Fingerprints From Domestic Passengers

ProfBooty brings us a story about England's Heathrow airport, which will begin fingerprinting passengers on its domestic flights later this month. Airport executives claim that the data will be stored for no longer than 24 hours, and will not be shared with law enforcement. We've previously discussed airport fingerprinting measures in the United States and Japan. Quoting: "All four million domestic passengers who will pass through Terminal 5 annually after it opens on March 27 will have four fingerprints taken, as well as being photographed, when they check in. To ensure the passenger boarding the aircraft is the same person, the fingerprinting process will be repeated just before they board the aircraft and the photograph will be compared with their face. Dr Gus Hosein, of the London School of Economics, an expert on the impact on technology on civil liberties, is one of the scheme's strongest critics. He said: 'There is no other country in the world that requires passengers travelling on internal flights to be fingerprinted. BAA says the fingerprint data will be destroyed, but the records of who has travelled within the country will not be, and it will provide a rich source of data for the police and intelligence agencies.'"

Comments

So what's the point?

[sqrt(2)]

data will be stored for no longer than 24 hours, and will not be shared with law enforcement. Then why are you doing it? It seems like they're just trying to get the citizens used to these kinds of abuses so that when they do start cross-checking and retaining data indefinitely nobody will be able to tell the difference, or care.

And Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

Re:So what's the point?

[palegray.net]

They can have my fingerprints when they pry them from my cold, dead... oh, wait.

Re:So what's the point?

[shoemilk]

Exactly, It's not like the terrorist didn't have leagal and valid id! They were exactly who they said they were! There is no point! I need more exclamation points!

Re:So what's the point?

[Original Replica]

There is only no point if you still believe that all this new "security" is actually about terrorists. If you view it from the idea of making people used to the idea of being bullied and controlled then it makes perfect sense. "A society will remain as free or as enslaved as the conscious dispositions of individuals determine it shall be. Just as the roots of oppression are found in passivity, the foundations of our liberty reside in highly energized and focused minds that insist upon their independence. There are no shortcuts, no structures or doctrines that can be erected, no hallowed documents to be revered, to save us the effort of continually challenging those who would presume to exercise authority over our lives." -- Butler Shaffer

Re:So what's the point?

[buro9]

Civil disobedience doesn't work any more.

If you get arrested, and they charge you some for some piddling small offense, then you've just gone and screwed your freedom to travel permanently.

Any trip this Briton would make to the USA or another country will now not be eligible under Visa Waiver Programs as a criminal record (when not a driving offence) requires that you obtain a visa to travel. The US embassy visa process takes 31 weeks from end to end (starting to gather pre-requisites through to obtaining a B1/B2 visa in your passport).

And to go through that process I'd have to give a foreign government far more information than that which I would have had to give the people at Terminal 5.

Civil disobedience in this day and age just marks you negatively for the rest of your life. Unless the action is large and total, it just wouldn't work. And most people don't want to fight, they want to get on their plane and reach their destination.

I personally think we've long ago crossed the line into being a surveillance world. All countries, not just the UK.

When I go to the US my details are taken, my fingerprints, photos, credit card numbers that were used to book the flight, which hotel I'm staying at, departure date, hire car details.

It already is the case that every move I make I consider the possible future ramifications of that move and how any action now might affect me in 15 years time.

This all reminds me of the Stasi. We're all spying on each other now, and all of that data business and government hold and will use against use. Be it credit refusal, travel restrictions, political control. We're already there.

Re:So what's the point?

[Cederic]

When I go to the US my details are taken, my fingerprints, photos, credit card numbers that were used to book the flight, which hotel I'm staying at, departure date, hire car details. So don't go.

And stop flying through Heathrow. Refuse to let them take your fingerprints.

It doesn't take many people to start making this stand and the airlines and airports will start complaining to the Government about their reduced revenue.

No civil disobedience required, just a small amount of personal sacrifice. Or are you personally selling out while decrying the rest of us for doing so?

WTF.

[headkase]

What the hell is going on these last few years?! Ever since some wackos killed less people than die from AIDS in a day the US, UK, and AU seem hell bent racing each other to see who can become China first! It's time to face the fact: the terrorists have won. Not flamebait, just a sober realization.

Re:WTF.

[megaditto]

But I still don't think that answers GP's question: why is this happening now instead of back when IRA blew up bomb and killed people pretty much weekly?

Is it the teletubbies instilling their gay agenda into the young minds? All the mercury in marmite rotting their brains? The hot East-European chicks infecting the populate with the highly contageous BendOverForAuthoritis?

Why are Britons turning into a bunch of craven pussy chickenshits (for lack of a better word)?

Sure, I believe that.

[palegray.net]

There is no other country in the world that requires passengers travelling on internal flights to be fingerprinted. BAA says the fingerprint data will be destroyed, but the records of who has travelled within the country will not be, and it will provide a rich source of data for the police and intelligence agencies. So these intelligence agencies are perfectly fine with the prospect of not receiving fingerprints when they have already been collected? Where's the evidence these fingerprints are going to be destroyed? Or does it go like this: We destroyed the file containing your fingerprints... but about any copies of the file we really can't speak.

It's already started

[g_hill]

They're not waiting for Terminal 5, I was photographed and fingerprinted like a criminal today on my way home from a meeting in Hamburg, via Heathrow Terminal 1. I wasn't happy, why should I as a UK passport holder have my fingerprints taken? It's a police state.

Re:It's already started

[rabiddeity]

Uh huh. And if you refuse, are they going to keep you, a citizen, from re-entering your own country? Arrest you? I wonder what the charges would be.

No, sir, here's the proper chain of dialog in this situation:

Them: Passport please.
You: Here you are.
Them: Fingers on the reader, please.
You: No.
Them: I can't let you into the country without fingerprints.
You: I'm a British citizen. The passport and photo prove it. Are you going to keep me out of my own country?
Them: ...
You: I'm a citizen, and I'm suspected of no crime. You have no right to take my fingerprints. I refuse to give them.

Do it calmly and nonviolently.

I suppose they'd arrest you then and get your fingerprints anyway. But if you did it, it would cause a row. If you and 4 other people did it, you might make the news. If you and 19 other people did it, it would certainly make the news. If you got a hundred people together to do it, it would make international headlines. And then things might have a chance at being changed. How much does a flight to Paris and back cost?

The problem is that you can't trust anyone

[cheros]

The UK government has a long and rich history of allowing the police and secret service to get away with pretty much anything they like. What you get if it leaks is some blip in the press, that takes a few days and then things will progress as before.

You make take it as significant that since New Labour came to power there has been a sharp decline in people being ejected from their posts for abject failure, even the guy responsible for the process failures that led to the loss of 2 CDs with the details of several million people on did not actually lose his job after he "resigned", he now works in a much cushier position at Cabinet Office. Yes, that's right, in principle a promotion. That's a subtle hint of how New Labour thinks about privacy.

It follows thus that what Heathrow management says and what really will happen is VERY likely to be different, or it will be a weasel argument as "WE only keep it 24h, but it's not our fault the police takes a copy at 12h and we don't know what they do with it". I hope they have at least the intelligence to store the fingerprints as a hash, but given the predicted leak I am willing to bet that it's full imagery.

And in that case, imagine what may be on the next CDs (sorry DVDs - fingerprints need space) that will be lost? Exactly, the one bit of data you normally control because you have it physically on you, and the one aspect you can't change other than with judicious use of a sharp knife or strong acid (apparently, never felt the need for it myself :-).

I will avoid any route going through terminal 5. What's more, as that is a BA terminal it's a good argument to avoid flying BA altogether - from what I've heard (since the luggage debacle) that's not a bad idea anyway.

Or investigate fake fingers..