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.'"

16 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. That reminds me by paiute · · Score: 4, Funny

    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
    1. Re:That reminds me by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, and have the distance between you eyes adjusted, lower your nose, change the bridge of your nose, and sink your cheek bones, flatten your forehead, pin your ears back, and lower them as well, change your jaw line. Photo recognition software could care less about hair color and beards.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:That reminds me by jrmcc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why not - Amanda Bynes did it...

  2. Welcome to 1984 ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Welcome to 1984 ... by CKW · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > 1984

      Is infinite and open access to information the core of "what's wrong" with society in 1984? Or is it the fact that the citizens have no control over their government, no freedom of speach, etc?

      What's the technological difference between

      - all citizens each day looking at photos of people wanted by the police for what we consider crimes, and calling the local detachment when we recognize someone
      - a computer doing the above
      - citizens calling the KGB because their neighbour said something snarky about the state
      - a computer doing the above

      > Brave New World

      And I quote: "The vast majority of the population is unified under the World State, an eternally peaceful, stable global society in which goods and resources are plentiful (because the population is permanently limited to no more than two billion people) and everyone is happy."

      I strongly object to warrantless wiretapping, and I definitely want tons of checks and balances, and I want my elected representatives to share my values.

      That doesn't mean that "databases" are inherently bad, or can't help us create a more effective just society. Like all tools, it depends on how you use them. Ever read "The Golden Age" by John C. Wright, or any of the Polity novels by Neal Asher?

    2. Re:Welcome to 1984 ... by spire3661 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The core problem of information in 1984 is that it is completely malleable by the party. Black literally becomes white at a party member's whim.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:Welcome to 1984 ... by Applekid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The difference between 1984 and Brave New World is dystopia by oppression versus dystopia by apathy.

      The true dystopian future is going to wind up being a little of both. Oppressive regimes that are impossible to overthrow, and apathy by those under their thumbs to actually do anything about it because they're living comfortable lives as long as they keep their heads down and try not to shake the tree too hard.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
  3. In Capitalist U$A by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the Government watches you.

  4. Facial Recog not as great as people think by kannibal_klown · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?

    1. Re:Facial Recog not as great as people think by _xeno_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I remember watching a program about the police work done after the Boston Marathon bombing. They took the photographs produced by the FBI and ran them against facial recognition.

      After a LOT of tweaking, they were able to get the actual photo of the actual bomber into the top 20 matches! By which I mean it was the 20th highest match out of a database of "samples" and not, say, all license photos. I think the entire sample size was in the thousands, so - not exactly a great example of facial recognition helping. And this was after they caught him, and after a lot of tweaking to try and "enhance" the photo they had off surveillance cameras.

      If anyone ever wanted a great example of photo recognition not helping catch people or why PRISM is entirely useless, the Boston Marathon bombing is a perfect example. Not only did photo recognition not help catch them, not only did having a giant database of phone calls not help, not only did declaring martial law and shutting down an entire metro area not help, having a notice from Russia saying "this man is a radicalized Islamic terrorist" didn't help!

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  5. You don't get it by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Privacy? No, privacy is only for the government.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  6. We knew this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:We knew this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From where I sit, the tea partiers are a bunch of extremely stupid, selfish, and short-sighted teabaggers. Sort-of the political equivalent of tin foil mad hatters. Hysterical and loud, but not the teeniest bit of funny.

      Of course, they'll happily brand me a commie once they learn I'm from faraway yurp, where by and large the medical system is socialist yet costs half of what it does in the USoA without Obamacare. On things like gun control I can't really be arsed to care, you sort it out. But demanding the freedom to get crippled by medical costs should anything happen because you can't afford regular insurance, when less liberated countries do provide medical care to everybody and manage to do so without the crippling cost, that's just fscking stupid. Criminally so, especially for self-identifying christians.

      The thing with most politics in the USoA is that it isn't about your particular stance, but about whose side you're on, and then for great bashing of the other side. Again from here, it's indiscernible wtf you're on about, except that it involves lots of shouting and absolutely no brains. The tea partiers are a painfully worse lot in a bad bunch.

      In that respect they're experts in making themselves deservedly unheard over their own din regardless of the merits of their points, if any. Experts in doing their points a disservice to the detriment of all, if you will. Which, by and large, isn't a bad thing given what can be discerned from their issues.

  7. The IRS recently proved abuse happens by kawabago · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:The IRS recently proved abuse happens by PracticalM · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except that the IRS targeting of tea party organization was also accompanied by targeting of organizations with Progressive in their name. And more left organizations were actually denied tax exempt status (which isn't hard because no tea party organizations were denied tax exempt status). And the IRS guy in charge was a Bush appointee. And Bush era IRS targeted liberal churches that dared to mention there was an election happening at the same time that conservative churches were beating the drums to elect Bush. And really the tragedy is that we let any groups that are not 100% dedicated to social welfare claim tax exempt status at all and/or hide their donors.

      Love how conservatives continually claim to be persecuted and the facts tend to disagree.

  8. Re:state dmv records mined by police by Nickodeimus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is not that it doesn't make things better. The problem is where, how, and when it will be abused. (It's 100% certain that there will be no if, because we all know that the government already gathers as many reins of power to itself as it can grasp.)

    This is the concept that most people don't recognize. Most people say\think that its all good to protect the children or catch the terrorists. But what happens if you are in that database and some government entity unlawfully decides that your class of people, whatever it may be, needs to be disenfranchised, persecuted, or even killed off?

    People will almost always say that those things can never happen here in the US. It happens in other places in the world but never here. The reason it doesn't happen here, for the most part, is because we have been, and must be, ever vigilant for these kinds of abuses and crush them when they start down that proverbial slippery slope.

    Don't open the door to the possibility of it happening and it never will. By allowing this type of scenario to occur we are definitely opening the door.