FBI Can Access Hundreds of Millions of Face Recognition Photos (eff.org)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via EFF: The federal Government Accountability Office published a report on the FBI's face recognition capabilities that says the FBI has access to hundreds of millions of photos. According to the GAO report, the FBI's Facial Analysis, Comparison, and Evaluation (FACE) Services unit not only has access to the FBI's Next Generation Identification (NGI) face recognition database of nearly 30 million civil and criminal mug shot photos, but it also has access to the State Department's Visa and Passport databases, the Defense Department's biometric database, and the drivers license databases of at least 16 states. This totals 411.9 million images, most of which are Americans and foreigners who have committed no crimes. In May, it was reported that the FBI is keeping information contained in the NGI database private and unavailable. It argues in a proposal that the database should be exempt from the Privacy Act.

Comments

Blatant admission.

[msauve]

"It argues in a proposal that the database should be exempt from the Privacy Act."

Which is a blatant admission that they are currently violating it.

Re: Blatant admission.

[93 Escort Wagon]

Wait - I must've missed the time they said they were sorry...

Re:Blatant admission.

[davester666]

We are all just unconvicted criminals living in the community.

Ergo

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't get a passport or join the military.

Re:Ergo

[jfdavis668]

Or get a driver's license.

Re:Ergo

[Anonymous Coward]

If you join the military, you have to give your DNA (you have no choice).

This DNA is available to the FBI, all 50-states, and the EU, UK and AUS by means of information sharing agreements. Your DNA will be used to convict you regardless of any objection you might have if you ever are accused of a crime.

Re:Ergo

[EzInKy]

Your DNA will be used to convict you regardless of any objection you might have if you ever are accused of a crime.

Or it will exonerate you if you are innocent. Not that I'm for all this overreach but just stating the obvious.

Re:Ergo

[BitterOak]

Your DNA will be used to convict you regardless of any objection you might have if you ever are accused of a crime.

Or it will exonerate you if you are innocent. Not that I'm for all this overreach but just stating the obvious.

People can always offer a DNA sample voluntarily if they feel it will exonerate them.

Re:Ergo

[Anonymous Coward]

And in peaceful times against the populace as well as friendly nations is exactly all of the uses this has been getting used for.

These programs don't even pay attention to hostile nations, let alone try to do anything to stop the terrorists; those are nothing but the eternal excuse for what is done to us.

Re:Ergo

[omnichad]

This is the modern way of doing war and I prefer it to the horrible two world wars of the 20th century.

Sure you do. That's what they hope. It's not like it hasn't been foretold as leading to dystopian futures in science fiction novels dating back 50 years or more.

Re:Ergo

[inode_buddha]

The Amish seem to do just fine, and I doubt they are on anyone's watch list. That said, I think we all need to train the FBI to recognize goatse. Kinda like how everyone is Spartacus, we can all be goatse.

Re:Ergo

[Lunix Nutcase]

What I do not like is if spy technology gets used in peaceful times or against befriended nations you form alliances with. Maybe some intelligence is appropriate, and in fact important for a better diplomatic climate, but that can happen with simply doing open source collection.

That's what you get by giving the power to begin with. Did you forget the old saying about how power corrupts?

Re: Ergo

[phaethon2k]

I read this three times and have no idea what you are trying to say. I like puppies.

Re:Ergo

[AHuxley]

Re a passport or photo ID... Its getting hard or more expensive to pay out per month for the ability of not having photo ID at some point in getting work or needed account creation at a city and state level.
To cash a low wage from a job with no photo ID takes a percentage of a lower wage every month.
Needing a real bank account to pay wages in is getting more accepted or needed under state of federal regulations, new applications might need a photo ID, getting past an interview might need more photo ID. That basic on site work photo database ID gets shared with federal gov, more security or background information required for an offer of advancement or just keeping an entry level job due to new state or federal regulations.
What was once sighted photo ID is now getting to be scanned ID shared with state and federal databases.
Random requests for chat downs on public transport with a camera pointed at every passenger, chat downs near public transport hubs, sharing of public and private CCTV networks covering all faces walking past 24/7 in many city areas or in smaller towns. The federal facial databases of every driver and passenger near international boarder crossing areas along all main roads in that state.

Facial recognition could be requested by local on site private sector security contractors or police via fusion centre support after an event or chat down.
Its now just more easy and simple to collect all faces as images in a security network package as sold for any and all later sorting of people passing a building, location, mil or gov sensitive area or city location. Why wait for a security contractor to notice something when its cheaper for every face can be kept and shared with the federal gov?

The other aspect is that of the "first amendment audit" with people staying on public land with a video camera and been approached by local police, federal officials or private sector security on public land for a "chat down" after been seen with a "camera". The resulting fun conversation about been confronted on public land is then posted on social media.
Mil, gov, federal sites, local gov officials are building shared databases to track such people and give them no new funny chat down comments or to track back their vehicle or any local supporters with a second camera, secondary zoom or video in the area.

Re:Ergo

[AHuxley]

Selective service (draft) may soon not just be a paper form that gets filled out by some people every generation. One easy simple way to get every generation with a digital photo on federal file is to ask for a photo ID to be presented for that file to be fully and correctly created.
Its hard for anyone given expected law changes to escape not been on such as file as they would be on other databases but not that federal call up list during later years of education, work, domestic travel or in other state of federal databases.
Any person wanting exemption during a later call up event (war or some new legal aspect of federal "conscription") for any reason (faith, further education, medical, conscientious objector) would have to be on file with photo ID in a federal database for any consideration.

Lack of any Selective Service file becomes a very simple per face internal passport for everyone. Hard to change a face or keep away for handing over photo ID, avoid all shared public private sector state and federal CCTV capture. A very simple "look up" would show if a person was on file or not.

Re:Ergo

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

The Amish seem to do just fine, and I doubt they are on anyone's watch list.

Sure, if you like living in the 17th century.

And I wouldn't count on them not being on some sort of watch list- the Amish are "different", somewhat self-sufficient, insular, and oppose the government on basic principles. Those two of those things make you a "threat" in a lot of agencies eyes.

Re:Ergo

[BlueStrat]

Re a passport or photo ID... Its getting hard or more expensive to pay out per month for the ability of not having photo ID at some point in getting work or needed account creation at a city and state level.
To cash a low wage from a job with no photo ID takes a percentage of a lower wage every month.
Needing a real bank account to pay wages in is getting more accepted or needed under state of federal regulations, new applications might need a photo ID, getting past an interview might need more photo ID. That basic on site work photo database ID gets shared with federal gov, more security or background information required for an offer of advancement or just keeping an entry level job due to new state or federal regulations.
What was once sighted photo ID is now getting to be scanned ID shared with state and federal databases.
Random requests for chat downs on public transport with a camera pointed at every passenger, chat downs near public transport hubs, sharing of public and private CCTV networks covering all faces walking past 24/7 in many city areas or in smaller towns. The federal facial databases of every driver and passenger near international boarder crossing areas along all main roads in that state.

Facial recognition could be requested by local on site private sector security contractors or police via fusion centre support after an event or chat down.
Its now just more easy and simple to collect all faces as images in a security network package as sold for any and all later sorting of people passing a building, location, mil or gov sensitive area or city location. Why wait for a security contractor to notice something when its cheaper for every face can be kept and shared with the federal gov?

The other aspect is that of the "first amendment audit" with people staying on public land with a video camera and been approached by local police, federal officials or private sector security on public land for a "chat down" after been seen with a "camera". The resulting fun conversation about been confronted on public land is then posted on social media.
Mil, gov, federal sites, local gov officials are building shared databases to track such people and give them no new funny chat down comments or to track back their vehicle or any local supporters with a second camera, secondary zoom or video in the area.

What is needed is to turn it back on those in power.

Create smart-phone apps that can be used to snap photos, along with time/location data, of LEOs/TLA agents/politicians/bureaucrats/officials and other assorted government lackeys to multiple cross-checked databases in foreign nations not part of the "5 Eyes" and who are not given to kow-towing to the "5 Eyes" nations or their allies.

Use data analysis tools including facial recognition to plot out all their associations, travel patterns, spouses/partners/family relationships, financial/banking/investment data, medical/psychological profiles, who pays them off, who they pay off, etc etc and make it available to anyone (because any foreign State-sponsored hackers will surely access data held by the US government on its' citizens as has already been proven by recent breaches regarding the governments' own members that were made public).

It may even be possible to match government super-computer analysis with a type of "folding@home" style shared data analysis tool.

We have the numbers. Crowd-source as much as possible. We can collect more complete data on them in less time than they can us. Together we can create tools to utilize that data better and faster than they can.

Turn the Panopticon back on them. Make the information-analysis playing field level once more. Create a MAD-style "Mexican standoff" scenario in which the government dare not try to go all "1984" on citizens because citizens can do the same and better to those in power.

Strat

Re:Ergo

[hodet]

At wartime military officials have lots of power over civilians of the nation they are fighting. They can shoot somebody and tell they wanted to take their gun, and maybe get away with it. I'd rather have people who haven't commited than ones who do.

I have taken a crack at translating this because the first sentence is very true.

Here goes....

During wartime military officials have a lot of power over civilians of the nation they are fighting for. A military official could just shoot someone without just cause and later claim that the civilian was reaching for their weapon. There is a good chance that the military official would get away with it.

The last sentence gets me a bit, but I think you are saying....

If you were the FBI you would rather have law abiding citizens in your database because this would allow you to expand your power.

Re:Ergo

[camperdave]

Can't they, I don't know, give them some metal tags to wear around their neck or something?

Re:Ergo

[camperdave]

Did you forget the old saying about how power corrupts?

Absolutely.

Re:Ergo

[AmiMoJo]

Problem is that DNA evidence is rarely clear-cut. Like fingerprints, it is open to interpretation. The way it is processed also affects the outcome. Juries, unfortunately, are often not aware of this.

It's bad enough with fingerprints, where experts are expensive but at least only have to look at the evidence to form a conclusion. If the prosecution says it's your fingerprint you can probably afford your own expert to say that it isn't. With DNA though the process used to form a conclusion is destructive and relatively expensive, and you don't have access to the police database. Database access is important because if the sample matches other people but the police decide it must be you, they might not even tell you about the other ones.

Also, if you submit a sample or have one forcefully taken but are then found innocent, it can be very hard to have it removed from the database.

Re:Ergo

[NotInHere]

Wow, seems I haven't given attention and I've really fscked up the grammar with this one.

You are almost right about the first part, lemme modify it to outline what I wanted to say:

During wartime military officials have a lot of power over civilians of the nation they are fighting against. A military official could just shoot someone without just cause and later claim that the civilian was reaching for their (or the soilder's) weapon. There is a good chance that the military official would get away with it.

About the last sentence:

I would rather have military officials exert that power who haven't commited crimes than ones who have, because criminals are more likely to abuse their powers, as they have already broken the law once.

Deat Uncle Sam,

[transami]

Please keep bombing other countries so you will have an endless litany of excuses. We never really wanted our freedoms anyway. Thanks.

Turn it around.

[Anonymous Coward]

If they, or a sister agency that they could rely on, didn't have that capability, people would question their competence and use of taxpayer money.

What happens when someone who's not on a watch list commits a heinous crime on US soil, and law enforcement can't identify the person, unmasked, in good quality surveillance footage?

Citizens would say WTF. We can't even start our investigation.

Re:Turn it around.

[StikyPad]

What happens when someone who's not on a watch list commits a heinous crime on US soil, and law enforcement can't identify the person, unmasked, in good quality surveillance footage?

I'll give you a hint: They add their image or likeness to the "Wanted" page here as "Unknown Suspect" or "Unknown Individual."

Re:Nah, I'm too ugly in different ways each month.

[PPH]

"We have an ID on the suspect sir. It's Guy Fawkes. Again."

more likely...

[NotQuiteReal]

ID your "remains" when an IED has reduced you to a smear.

keep posting those selfies.

[WolfgangVL]

Here's a selfie of me reading between the lines. And a video of me wondering why nobody else is thinking about the COST of the "social media revolution"

Re:keep posting those selfies.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the native Americans of generations past would be honored that their superstitious beliefs about their souls being stolen in a photograph have made their way back into mainstream American culture once more.

CAPTCHA: handsome .. aww, shucks, NSA.

Re: FBI = gestapo ?

[omnichad]

word salad much?

Don't forget...

[Anonymous Coward]

your 2500+ dollar fee in order to voluntarily renounce your US citizenship so they can't come after you legally as a US citizen for any acts you commit that may be legal where you're living but the US doesn't like. Why so much? Because assholes who renounce it to dodge taxes shouldn't be allowed to without paying a penalty. (LOL! Go look at post-citizenship US tax requirements. You're supposed to keep filing for *10* years after you leave the US. The only thing those filing/renunciation fees affect is the little guy trying to get out because the US has stopped being somewhere 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' is possible while also enjoying your constitutional freedoms to any believable levels.

and?

[superwiz]

Government can more efficiently search government records (legally obtained in this case). You submit passport photos and police is legally within their rights to take mug shots when they arrest someone. I am confused about why this is an issue. Even if they use it to search for a face captured on some camera during a purported crime, isn't this why these records are kept in the 1st place? Or is it ok if a victim looks through 20 folders of mugshots, but not ok if a computer looks through the same records based on an image from a store cam after a store got robbed? Where is the problem?

Re:and?

[superwiz]

How many times have you heard a news report that "the perpetrator/victim was known to police". Ever wonder what that means? Now, do you think, "OK, they have an entry in a government worker/citizen database, nothing special about that." Or do you think, "Aha, that person has a criminal record, it's a good thing they were caught"?

No, not really. Anyone who calls the police to report a crime in progress, or even loud noises late at night, can be "known to the police". So, no, I don't assume this phrase means anything other than that the police knew the identity of the person.

This is an extra-judicial database. It has much the same status as the No Fly List.

Not at all. The No Fly List is actually preventing legal behavior. A database of faces just allows the government to put a face to a name. I hope you understand that before the cell phones, the police actually had easier time of doing that than they do now. Most people's names and addresses were in white page. If you are arguing that now you can put a name to a face instead of just a face to a name... that's probably true, but to it's in itself an accusation. Camera's can capture faces of eyewitness of crimes. Just as eyewitnesses can recognize other bystander eyewitnesses and inform the police that those people might have observed more. Realistically, all this does is make cameras act as eyewitnesses. The ability of the government to misuse these resource for non-designated purposes is not new. Cops could always follow innocent people to catch them in embarrassing acts or minor infractions if they had a strong desire to do so. Now it has a reduced cost, but, in principle, no new capability has been created. This makes the investigating of public behavior cheaper. It does not intrude into private behavior, so it does not and should not need a warrant.

Re:and?

[superwiz]

You submit passport photos for the purpose of putting them on the passport which only YOU need to keep to use for international travel (as an example).

NO. Resoundingly, no. If that were the case, you would be able to affix it to the passport yourself and have the affixing notorized. As it is, you send it away to be kept in government records in case your face is necessary to verify (if you go dead or missing or show up at an embassy in a foreign country and claim that your passport and all documents were stolen or confiscated). Your passport is a government document requesting that you be permitted passage through foreign countries. The request is made by the US Federal Government on behalf of the government. And the passport itself is government property. You can be denied a passport (without cause). Government taking actions on your behalf is very much a privilege you (and all of us) enjoy. You don't have the expectation, for example, that US would go to war with a country if it arrested you without giving you access to a US ambassador. But the US State Department will go out of its way to make sure you are not arbitrarily thrown in jail while travelling abroad. You don't think expecting all of this comes without the expectation that they will keep a copy of your picture so that they can verify who you are, do you?

Re:ftfy

[superwiz]

How can it not be? Why do you need a warrant for the government to search government records? These are not even private records. You face is not a private record. You show it in public all the time.

Honestly

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Am I the only one who isn't surprised in the slightest by this?

Of course the FBI/CIA/NSA or whoever will use every possible tool at their disposal. The question of legality doesn't enter into the equation for these people, it's not even a concern unless they think they might be caught. Otherwise it's "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead."

Seriously, if any of you still harbor the childishly naive belief that the nation's law enforcement agencies are constrained by the law in any way, shape, or form, please contact me as I have a lovely bridge in Brooklyn that I'll sell dirt cheap.

Face facts:

- Your privacy is gone.
- Your personal information is for sale to the highest bidder.
- Your rights only matter if they don't get in the way of "fighting terrorism" or "upholding the law" or "protecting the children" or whatever the slogan of the week is.
- If you have money or connections you can get away with damn near anything, otherwise expect to be fucked, and fucked hard. (Those prisons aren't going to fill themselves!)

Oh sure, you may win some small battles, but that's penny ante stuff. If you get in the way of anyone or anything with moneyed interests, consider yourself squashed, because you will be.

Re:Honestly

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

So, when are you leaving?

I'm not leaving, I like it this way. Having the government monitoring everything everywhere all the time makes me feel safe, super-duper safe! No bad thoughts, no bad thoughts...only happy-happy think pictures!

Re:Honestly

[Matheus]

Not surprised at all since I helped build the system.

DoS has been matching Passport and Visa photos for a long long time. The only news here is that the FBI, only somewhat recently, added Face and Iris to their NGIS Fingerprint system. The fact they can search all 3 databases from one source was a fairly easy piece of middleware since all the databases are running the same Biometric software.

The world rotates based on a careful balance of the illusion of security and the illusion of privacy... people still enjoy their delusions tho.

PS. DNS-and-BIND apparently read a completely different post than yours. Reactionary response to something I'm pretty sure you didn't say..

Just get it over with

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Just microchip us all at birth and be done with it.

Hundreds of Millions? Never mind . . .

[swell]

Analyst Emily Lutella says "Oops, that's very different." It's actually seven million faces with photos taken from different angles. Government experts have a five year plan to identify faces regardless of angle, lighting, makeup, glasses, hats or Guy Fawkes masks.

Re:Nah, I'm too ugly in different ways each month.

[GeekWithAKnife]

Funny but in all seriousness paraphernalia to prevent facial recognition systems from working are going to pick up.

We can no longer trust our governments not to abuse data they collect and they already collect the data before it was even approved!

Some say it's already too late because of driver's licenses and passports but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Facial recognition is coming to a CCTV near you! if it's not already there. Minority report style tracking is not that far fetched in our lifetime.

It's the usual argument right, what do you have to hide? -so why can we not read all the FBI's internal memos? what do they have to hide?

I have nothing to hide but letting someone arbitrarily read my mail is not something I agree to. I don't give a shit if it's only my water bill, it's no ones fucking business but mine.

False positive rate?

[Ihlosi]

Suppose I'm in the database, having entered the US on multiple occsions ... what is the false positive rate of the systems, and with what probability can I expect to be confused with some criminal and denied entry/arrested/diappeared off to some island?

It's not at all about dodging taxes.

[Ihlosi]

Because assholes who renounce it to dodge taxes shouldn't be allowed to without paying a penalty.

I don't think anyone who's dodging taxes will worry about small change like $2500.

However, US citizens who simply live abroad and are cut off from simple financial services (say, a stock market account, loans, savings accounts, certain life insurance policies) in the country they live in due to to FATCA shenanigans - they often don't have $2500 to spend on paperwork. And often they wouldn't even have to pay US taxes due to taxation treaties (you still have to file them, though, and claim the exemptions states in the corresponding treaty).

Cheaper, non-troubling options:

[sabbede]

search google and/or facebook.

Plus...

[sootman]

... no sense mentioning I'm sure they've made their own private mirror of every tagged photo from Facebook, Instagram, etc.

Re:Plus...

[Bob the Super Hamste]

Well I would be all for that, just be sure to tag appropriately and incorrectly. Facebook's facial recognition for a while was really good a finding faces in mariposa lilies so I took to tagging myself in them and got my friends to do the same. I also tag my self when it finds a "face" in a random ordering of leaves, grass, pebbles, or other seemingly faceless images.