Slashdot Mirror
State Photo-ID Databases Mined By Police
Rick Zeman writes "Showing once again that once a privacy door is opened every law enforcement agency will run through it, The Washington Post details how state drivers license photo databases are being mined by various LEOs in their states--and out. From the article: '[L]aw enforcement use of such facial searches is blurring the traditional boundaries between criminal and non-criminal databases, putting images of people never arrested in what amount to perpetual digital lineups. The most advanced systems allow police to run searches from laptop computers in their patrol cars and offer access to the FBI and other federal authorities. Such open access has caused a backlash in some of the few states where there has been a public debate. As the databases grow larger and increasingly connected across jurisdictional boundaries, critics warn that authorities are developing what amounts to a national identification system — based on the distinct geography of each human face.'"
every time someone gives a description of a getaway car, the cops look it up in the state DMV database. my car's data is in there. my privacy is violated daily because my car might be coming up in searches
My license renewal is coming up. Time to grow a beard and dye my hair.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
These guys are really trying hard to make sure 1984 and Brave New World actually come true.
Once they have it, they'll misuse it, and tell you it's for your own good.
Freedom has gone out of fashion, and now we're stuck with the surveillance society.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
the Government watches you.
Ignoring the legal ramifications of this (for now)...
Facial Recognition is neat, I'll give it that. BUT it's not as accurate as people think. Against a small sample set (hundreds) OR with very solid source pics (both A and B) it's decent. But between poor surveillance images and the "margin of error" settings on the software you can end up with lots of false positives.
Add that to the huge DMV databases across the country, you're going to get a LOT of false positives. Sometimes too much data is worse than too little. Imagine showing all 30 matches of VERY VERY similar people to a witness who's already nervous enough. I know the cops already show them handfuls of similar pics: but the "similar" pics might be "chubby white-skinned guy" and not "chubby white-skinned guys that looks REALLY REALLY REALLY similar"
All of this noise is going to cause a headache. Even just adjoining states, you're going to have close enough hits. So what, you're going to have to investigate them? If you're basing off a picture you can't just say "Well he's 30miles away so let's consider him but NOT that guy who's 40miles away"
Sure you might say "Well we'll factor criminal background into this." But if you're basing on a criminal record, then well, why not just use the mug shots?
Privacy? No, privacy is only for the government.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The state of the art in Facial Recognition software has a long way to go.
At best it can be used to give the police a list of people to look at, and certainly not a list of people to arrest.
There is a lot of false positives. I've tried several off the shelf packages, as well as the FR built into Google's Picasa. (surprisingly good).
Most of these have significant problems of false positives. My sisters look nothing alike, yet two of the commercial products and
Picasa always confuse them, presumably based on facial measurement.
A great deal of the false positives would be weeded out by the police just looking at the pictures, People are so much better at this than
machines.
The only abuse of this I can see is if you are summoned to appear or hauled in kicking and screaming based ONLY on some
automated FR software match. But FR will probably NEVER achieve the reliability standard of a fingerprint, let alone DNA.
So I feel confident that such pictorial drag-netting wouldn't be allowed by the courts. *Cough*. Sure I do.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
It's rather important to understand why this is in fact abuse, and not acceptable law enforcement behaviour.
I say the pictures were ment to provide easy verification that the driver's licence you're holding is in fact yours. Matching against databases was not in the original charter, so to speak, and in fact storing the pictures at all beyond display on the licence itself isn't either. It is this stretching of use beyond the original what is so deceitful and ultimately damaging to society.
This quite regardless of who does it (our watchers, for our own good, of course), with what intentions (the very best, for our own good, of course), the direct results (LE is happy with their new toy, for a while), and so on.
We probably ought to embrace the principle that data can only ever be used for the purpose it was gathered for, and nothing else. This seems, perhaps is rather draconian, but is the only way to be clear and honest about it, making it a better option than any of the alternatives.
You can vote cops out of office? Who Knew!?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
The IRS targeting tea party organizations for scrutiny proves that abuse happens today and will continue to happen as long as law enforcement has access to private personal information. Think how many times in your life someone has been exonerated after spending years in jail for crimes they didn't commit. It is an outright lie for anyone to say personal private information will not be abused. It is being abused now and that will continue. No matter what the President says, your information is not safe or secure and you can easily become a completely innocent target.
I think its fairly obvious the police know its not reliable.
Can you name even one CONVICTION where the only evidence was an automated photo match?
Can you name even one ARREST where the only basis was an automated photo match?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
"I am on the fence with this. If we are going to have a ID card it should be useful. But I do want strong oversight so it won’t be abused." In that case 50 individuals is better then a unilateral decider.
Good-bye
Amazing how people seem to think that any of this is new and the outrage this is causing.
This, and other technology being recently being "outed" has been around since the early-mid 2000's. How do I know? I wrote a lot of it while working for a provider of software for public safety and law enforcement. It isn't secret - you can go to their website and read the features the software provides. Or, you can read any of the LE magazines out there to learn what the various public safety software providers are, in fact, providing to police departments across the country.
Facial recognition was still in its early evolution when we looked at it back in, I believe, 2005-2007. When I left in 2009, we still had not integrated facial recognition into our desktop software (and, we we a leading provider) - let alone mobile software - it just wasn't ready. Other vendors did provide OCR to work with cameras that could read a license plate into software that would then look up the license plate in NCIC and the local DMV. Some states allowed more judicious use when querying the DMV. But, access to NCIC and the criminal justice information systems required probable cause to conduct a search. Each query was logged and, if questioned, the person making the request better have had a valid reason to have conducted the search. A case in point - it is well known that Phila. Traffic and Parking Authority uses OCR scanning to looking up scofflaws by scanning the plates of parked vehicles. Are they hitting the DMV or just a parking violation database managed by the city? That, I am not sure.
However, whenever someone is/was arrested and booked, their images, prints, tattoo information, etc, was placed into our database - instantly searchable by keyword for the generation of a line up. Most photos weren't suitable for facial recognition back then. Traffic analysis is not new either. Our case management system would allow associations to be derived based on information reported in an incident report or booking report. By following the trail, other potential suspects could be quickly discovered. I can see how this capability could be used with phone call meta-data. Was it done? Maybe. But, if it did, it required a warrant.
As for facial recognition - it's possible that today's software is ready to process DMV photos. Some states were requiring that images pass certain checks (via software) before being allowed to be submitted into the system But, I am not sure they can, legally, request those images for retention on their local systems. If it's legal now (at least in PA), I would be highly surprised.
Perhaps, someone currently working in the field, could clarify the current state regarding access to NCIC, DMV and similar systems?
Do you really know what a merkin is?
Anyone here with a scuba, or pilots license? Does it have your address on it???
This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
Now this is what I have to consider if I want to apply for a driver's license? Choosing between the privilege of travelling and being a false positive in some FBI chase?
Travel is a right not a "privilege," governments' opinion to the contrary notwithstanding. Those propaganda posters in your local DMV are just that — propaganda. Free travel included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but considering how much weight even the Constitution has in this country, I don't expect the situation to change for the better.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan