Interpol Pushing World Facial Recognition Database

The Register is reporting that according to some reports, Interpol will soon be pushing for a world-wide facial recognition database at the borders of all member nations. "The UK already has airport gates equipped with such technology, intended to remove the need for a human border guard to check that a passenger's face matches the one recorded in his or her passport. According to the Guardian, Interpol database chief Mark Branchflower believes that his organization should set up a database of facial-recognition records to operate alongside its existing photo, fingerprint and DNA files."

Comments

Re:There Already Is One

[bill_mcgonigle]

Here's a fairly balanced article on the CIA/Facebook connection.

Opt-out Where You Can

[bill_mcgonigle]

On the New Hampshire Driver's License application/renewal form, there's a checkbox on the back that requires the State to delete your photo from its database after making the license. (Now that they're mailing the licenses though I have to wonder about their backup strategies.)

Do it where you can and get your legislature to require your DMV to do so if necessary. Also get them to reject RealID. If you can't, move here.

Re:what is the current accurcy rate?

[TheLazySci-FiAuthor]

Even 1% false positives or negatives in a huge application will lead to lots of problems...

Ah yes, the base rate fallacy (aka, the terrorist fallacy).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy

One of those obvious things that is so hard to convey.

Interesting that the 'example' used in the wikipedia article is so near to what is happening in reality.

Not quite Big Brother

[Jabbrwokk]

The summary and the Register article make it sound like Interpol wants to keep a record of everyone with a passport. This does not appear to be the case, according to the original article which the Register ripped off and rewrote.

Senior figures want a system that lets immigration officials capture digital images of passengers and immediately cross-check them against a database of pictures of terror suspects, international criminals and fugitives.

Not that I like the scheme, but it doesn't sound quite as police-state as some might think. My picture is already taken all over the place if I go to the airport, this would take my picture and cross-check it with a database of known criminals, terrorists and fugitives.

Re:Alternate Applications

[TripMaster Monkey]

This technology doesn't work well enough for CCTV.

Sure about that? FTFA:

The attraction of facial-recognition records, as opposed to conventional mugshots, is that automated searching is possible. A specially-equipped airport gate - or even, in some circumstances, a security camera - would be able to sound an alert every time a person on the Interpol watch list went past.

Re:Terrorist face recognition!

[betterunixthanunix]

The 9/11 hijackers were not dressed in traditional middle eastern clothing. They were wearing run-of-the-mill business-casual clothing, which is why they were so successful -- they looked like normal travelers, and drew no attention to themselves at the airport.

Re:what is the current accurcy rate?

[rpmayhem]

I work for a local law enforcement agency that uses facial recognition systems. I don't work in that department, but I'm familiar with the systems. A few years ago, it was still really bad, but it's made large jumps in accuracy since that time. However, we usually have humans operating the cameras and computers, so it's always double checked. Everyone who gets booked into the jail is added to the facial recognition database. Then the officers on the road can use systems in their cars to take pictures of people and find their identity (a lot of people give us fake IDs, and a lot of those people have visited us before). Also, we have to ask permission before taking someone's picture on the street.

Anyway, even at the current level of accuracy, it can't operate really well without human assistance.

Re:what is the current accurcy rate?

[TheLazySci-FiAuthor]

I'm uncertain - are you arguing that he's fallen for the fallacy or pointing it out?

I am just trying to point it out in support of his statement...and I'm not doing a very good job, evidently :(

Re:There Already Is One

[k1e0x]

Once upon a time commitment to American principles made one a patriot. Now blind support of all government policies is required.

Yeah, the DHS had a pamphlet out that listed the Gadsden Flag as a symbol of domestic terrorism.

The line between patriotism and nationalism is a thin one.. but I believe that a nationalist is a blind patriot.

It really disturbs me when I hear John McCain talk about "Country first".. That is absolutely UN-American. Americans believe the individual needs are placed about the needs of the state. China is a place where the needs of the state come before those of the individual people, not America.