Slashdot Mirror
Vermont DMV Caught Using Illegal Facial Recognition Program (vocativ.com)
schwit1 quotes a report from Vocativ: The Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles has been caught using facial recognition software -- despite a state law preventing it. Documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont describe such a program, which uses software to compare the DMV's database of names and driver's license photos with information with state and federal law enforcement. Vermont state law, however, specifically states that "The Department of Motor Vehicles shall not implement any procedures or processes that involve the use of biometric identifiers." The program, the ACLU says, invites state and federal agencies to submit photographs of persons of interest to the Vermont DMV, which it compares against its database of some 2.6 million Vermonters and shares potential matches. Since 2012, the agency has run at least 126 such searches on behalf of local police, the State Department, FBI, and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.
they ALL look alike
Damn; these are some good mushrooms...
The state law probably prohibits facial recognition. It certainly doesn't prevent it.
It's not a law of nature, like gravity. It's one of those more petty laws of man.
From the summary, it doesn't seem to be illegal for the cops to check against DMV photos. It's the DMV that can't do the checking. Cause it's not their job to be doing it.
We should be able to run over lawyers, too.
See how weird it is when someone says that doing illegal things is okay because reasons?
Just... weird. :)
Vermont is for Federal Fugitives
This kind of thing will happen more often in the future and will more than likely become legal quickly.
I have been saying this for many years.... it doesn't matter what laws say, the government (and big business) is going to do whatever they want with data they collect. Most certainly the 3-letter agencies will.
I love it how things are worded "this data can only be used for XXXXX" or "can't be used for YYYYY" or "won't be disclosed to ZZZZZZ". Bull crap. They will do whatever they want and even if they abide by it for the moment, computers don't "forget" and laws can change at any time.
If you don't think the agencies have access to (or WILL have access to) every fingerprint collected, every photo, every DNA sample run, etc, then you are living in a fantasy world.
The only safe data (or biometric) is that not given and not collected.
you fail to comprehend the "at least" qualifier... the count is more likely in the thousands. there's only 126 that they've been CAUGHT performing. this is power-tripping, warrant and constitution-ignoring, data hungry government entities doing this.. what do you think?
There's no way this isn't happening everywhere. Camera detectors are actually a real thing now. I advise you all invest in them. Know when you're being filmed secretly as well as in plain sight. Make sure to ask the questions about where the data is going and what it's being used for and how well it's being secured. Be vigilant, people.
There’s 2.6 million *photos*, not Vermonters. They must be keeping the photos from previous drivers licenses, too. That’s about 4 photos per Vermonter.
Why should they be able to use your photo in the DMV database to compare it to the other image without your consent? If it was a blood drop was left at the scene of the crime then you would have to give them consent in order for them to take a sample (or they would have to convince a judge that it was likely enough to be you in order to get a warrant).
In this case you are freely letting them access another departments database without your permission. Yes, I realize that they could easily call you in and take a picture while you were in public but for that to happen they would have to know who you are in the first place. If they placed their own camera in public that did the face recognition in real-time with no storage of data then there wouldn't be a problem either.
If it's okay to let the police troll through the photos of the DMV why not have the passport office (whatever office that is) collect your genetic information at the time you get your passport to help with identification if you are in an accident abroad and let the police departments compare DNA samples against that database? (Yes, I'm aware that the DNA database has been proposed by some country already.) Same thing. Don't go giving up your rights so easily as you will quickly find others will be taken away even quicker. Take a look at what is happening in the UK and what May's government wants to do with the Internet.
Mr. Sanders to the white courtesy phone.
I'm sure he'll take the necessary time, to make sure the guilty public servants, from bottom to top of the chain, get their comeuppance.
RIGHT???
this system
yeah, they probably stopped using DMV and switched to Facebook
We should be able to run over lawyers, too.
See how weird it is when someone says that doing illegal things is okay because reasons?
Just... weird. :)
:)
I'm not saying it's okay to be breaking the law, just that the law is stupid if it prohibits the practice under certain conditions, and that if they are using it infrequently, the cost per use and tax burden are probably ridiculous. The law is sometimes stupid. When it is stupid, it should be changed.
Real lawyers write in C++
You can't prove that, and you have no standing to sue for discovery.
"126 people since 2012 means they're not using it."
Since you obviously flunked kindergarten math, you might want to change your claim once you learn that 126 doesn't equal 0.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
That's once a fortnight, on average. It's getting some use.
Might be of interest to investigate how a state with only 625,000 inhabitants comes by a data base of 2.6 million pictures.
BTW. Vermont didn't even put pictures on most driver's licenses until about 20 years ago. You had to drive to Montpelier if you wanted a picture license because the Montpelier office had the DMV's only camera.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Yeah, two dozen times a year - wow. And that number is spread across Federal, state, and local queries...
Ken
We are seeing many examples of where a bureaucrat is demonstrated to breach an explicit instruction and walks away. The answer lies in:
a) A general law that any legislation that instructs officers of the state to do something and which is then breached may allow their prosecution for abuse of power carrying a a maximum sentence of 20 years, and a MANDATORY loss of pension rights
b) Ensure that all laws with an instruction carry a similar penalty.
The person who makes the decision to implement the illegal action is fully and personally liable unless they can offer an explicit instruction from their superior. So if an NSA spook does something iffy, then they go to prison unless their boss does. If it was signed off by the President - well, he'll only be in office for 8 years...
Your Honor, my client killed only one of the over 600,000 people in Vermont. Clearly, he's not a murderer.
If they placed their own camera in public that did the face recognition in real-time with no storage of data then there wouldn't be a problem either.
I have a much bigger problem with government-owned public facing cameras performing 24/7 facial recognition than I do with the DMV doing some searches on a photo I knowingly gave them.
"His name was James Damore."
Yes, the law not allowing running over lawyers as preemptive self defense is indeed stupid.
That's a brilliant argument. So basically a serial killer who has only killed 126 people isn't really guilty of anything after all.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
"I said no camels not five camels, can't you count?"
- Indiana Jones
Well Ken, you dont deserve that 4 digit uid.
He only thieved 24 times over a year.
He only drank and drove 24 times over a year.
He only illegally used a DB 24 times over a year.
Clearly hes not a criminal. /sarc
Your point is MOOT.
Even once is against the law, and they should be held accountable.
1. Vermont has, for some time, been solidly Democrat. their last Republican Senator switched parties in 2001. Their last Republican Representative left office in 1991.
2. The populace has become majority Leftist.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
If a blood drop was left at the scene of the crime the police would run it through various state and federal databases that store DNA from legally approved harvesting methods. Your comparison would apply only if they singled you out as the person of interest and your DNA wasn't in the system. If it got to that point then they would probably have enough for a warrant.
Like this is the first time government officials are giving themselves an exception... From cops exceeding speed limits and driving the wrong way on one-way streets, to Amtrak's WiFi blocking Apple-store and Playboy.com (screw net-neutrality), to this.
Maybe, it is time for a Constitutional amendment prescribing a minimum punishment for such violations — nothing less will do...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The lying liars are forced to admit to a certain degree of illegal activity when completely cornered.
Why, exactly, is anyone believing that they've come completely clean? I mean, they've been so trustworthy up until now, right?
The government breaks laws all the time - with complete impunity. Agents of the government break the law all the time with impunity. Sadly this is not news. News would be if someone was actually punished. Big news would be if someone other than a low level peon was punished.
This strongly implies that Vermont is using parallel construction in the gathering of evidence and prosecution of suspects. Parallel construction denies people the right of due process by denying them their right to know the evidence used against them.
http://www.reuters.com/article...
A lot of criminals are going to walk in Vermont when they're lawyers start making use of this A lot. . Maybe even all three of them.