Slashdot Mirror


German Art Activists Get Passport Using Digitally Altered Photo of Two Women Merged Together (vice.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Last month, an activist from the German art collective Peng! walked into her local government office in Berlin and applied for a new passport. "I probably have broken the law," the woman, a chemist living in the Western Saxony region, told Motherboard, "but our lawyers don't know which one." The woman applied for a passport using a photo of two separate people. Using specialized software created by Peng!, the collective merged the facial vectors from two different faces from two different images into one. Billie Hoffman (a pseudonym used by everyone in the Peng! Collective when talking to journalists), she told me how easy the whole process was: "Officials didn't mention fraud at any point." Hoffman's passport application was approved, and now she has an official German passport using the digitally altered photo. The photo is half her, half Federica Mogherini, an Italian politician who is the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. "The software calculated an authentic average of the faces and that's it," Hoffmann recalls.

Hoffman's passport is part of an artwork called "Mask ID," a campaign that's encouraging ordinary citizens to "flood government databases with misinformation" and disrupt mass surveillance programs. Ironically, the project is funded by the Bundeskulturstiftung, the German Federal cultural fund, part one was recently on show in Hamburg accompanied by a photo booth where anyone could upload their image and create their own distorted passport picture in an attempt to confuse government surveillance and circumnavigate facial recognition software. "Passports are tools of oppression" another member of the collective who declined to give me their real name told me.

129 comments

  1. Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's literally all fun and games until someone literally gets hurt ... again ...

    Border control will come to matter to you at some point, but it might be too late :(

    1. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ah, so the artist is the problem, not the mile-wide hole in security she walked through. Gotcha.

    2. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If border control is a farce then why bother constructing tunnels to smuggle people in?

    3. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the problem: you go outside, dance around each night, and then when it rains 2 weeks later you claim your rain dance made it rain.

      It's infeasible to monitor an entire border; and then people go under it anyway. Talk about terrorists, drug cartels, and other well-funded and heavily-organized threats goes hand-in-hand with apprehending poor women fleeing from a creditor who wants to gangrape them to death and sell their children into sex slavery while the well-funded insurgents bypass all your security.

      We've done something. It did nothing, but we had to do something. Let's do it even more.

    4. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He literally explained why in the post you responded to, you fucking retard.

    5. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So you are claiming that border control does nothing, and the result would be exactly the same even if we got rid of all border controls across the world? Except for the tunnels of course, they would no longer be needed because people could freely walk across the border.

    6. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by postbigbang · · Score: 2

      Indeed there are sonograpic equipment combos that find tunnels. This isn't about tunnels. It's about failure to acknowledge that countries are often built on the backs of asylum seekers, migrants, refugees, and until recently, slaves. Cheap labor has its value.

      The farce is "Build The Wall" believing that other people will suddenly stop their lifestyles and go back to work, because that's how John Calvin envisioned the world. Doesn't work that way.

      There are tunnels from Israel to Egypt, Mexico to the USA, Bellingham to Vancouver. There are electronic money tunnels to The Caymans and Panama. Tunneling is a well-rewarded sport.

      Confounding privacy invasion and poor data privacy controls is also a blood sport. Surveillance societies need the control; it's a power trip and info-asset-greed posture I like the collective idea, however, although it waffles a bit on the civility test. Civility counts.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    7. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Wow, I didn't know that slavery suddenly doesn't exist now. Good tip. I'm not sure what the point is of you nutjobs. Are you saying get rid of border controls?

    8. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by postbigbang · · Score: 0

      Didn't say anything like that. Can I call you a nutjob, too?

      Slavery still exists.... we call it a job at Amazon, these days.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    9. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      "It's about failure to acknowledge that countries are often built on the backs of ... and until recently, slaves"

      Hate to break it to you, but that is still true even today.

    10. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      As mentioned, we agree. The terminology is just different.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    11. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because if you mention Northwestern Africa, you're branded a racist. If we don't talk about it long enough, eventually it goes away, amirite?

    12. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Shh, we just need to understand their culture.

    13. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Slavery exists everywhere. The context nexus was Germany (see post) and by my citation, the USA.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    14. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why did China build the Great Wall? It didn't 100% keep the Mongols out - the just climbed the wall. But their horses didn't, and it limited the amount of loot that could carry back with them after a raid.

      Physical security, like digital security, isn't about "all or nothing". Making it harder makes it harder. It's harder to walk across a desert than to drive.

      Meh, it's mostly symbolic anyway, and what people are actually arguing about is whether they like the symbolism. Why not just say "globalism is good; no borders" instead of pretending your objection is to the effectiveness of the wall?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    15. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by DogDude · · Score: 1

      What are you suggesting? Better border control wouldn't have prevented Hitler from murdering millions.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    16. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      Yes. It's economics.

      If it's not worth the effort, even the perceived effort, for the payoff, even the perceived payoff, it won't be done.

      Locks don't keep the honest and law-abiding out, they discourage the criminals and prevent the less competent ones.

      There is no absolute security for virtually anything. Just a sufficient amount to make the risk acceptable. And less security is needed when the value of the protected asset is less, or when recovery or replacement is cheap enough.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    17. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit.

    18. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Calydor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the idea that passports are 'tools of oppression' is the problem.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    19. Re: Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by jd · · Score: 1

      It limited what they took out... so they stole China instead.

      Well, actually, it didn't limit them at all. The guards had horses, for a start.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    20. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody forces you to work at Amazon or anywhere else. You can live in the streets and eat from trashcans. :)

    21. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Have you seen what happens when people do that? Look on sfgate.com for the District Poop Maps. I suspect many are similarly employed (or not even).

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    22. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Passports in and of themselves are not.

      Databases of faces (Passport, Driver's License, Student ID, etc) and ubiquitous facial recognition are more and more frequently being used as tools of oppression.

      An art project/political statement to populate these databases with junk data is a valid form of protest.

    23. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right. About the time the authorities try to ID some criminal, and they can't because a bunch of protesters have messed up the database. Of course, they will blame the authorities for not doing their job!

    24. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kill yourself. Twice.

    25. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by dryeo · · Score: 1

      It's probably the database of photos of peoples faces that they don't like. I know I don't like it.
      Soon I have to submit to having my photo taken to continue legally driving, I don't mind the drivers license but I do mind the digital copy going into some database to be abused by the government and whoever hacks into it, it'll probably find its way to facebook so they can figure out who I am.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    26. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Why did China build the Great Wall? It didn't 100% keep the Mongols out - the just climbed the wall.

      More specifically they bribed a guard to open the gate.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand how this is "art". Do they just call it art to hopefully avoid trouble?

    28. Re: Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Art is a form of civic education. When artists do it, it is art. So yes, especially when so open about it. Of course officials must now use 5-10 years to scramble together a solution to this hack.

    29. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, so the artist is the problem, not the mile-wide hole in security she walked through. Gotcha.

      Exactly.
      In my country it is the same any whitehat will instantly be put on trial as if he was a blackhat

      Sad really

    30. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The new passports are biometric.
      That means they contain fingerprint scans.

      If the photo half assed resembles you and you put the passport into a scanner and hold your finger over the finger print scanner: what exactly do you think border patrol is going to do? They wave you through!

      After all this is still a genuine passport with the correct name matching the finger prints ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    31. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If something is not 100% successful, it is useless. Never bother to do anything that does not produce absolute perfection. Defence in depth is a myth, one control must stop all threats all the time and everywhere or we don't bother implementing it. Any control that has more than 0.00% false positives is unjust and opressive. Any control that has more than 0.00% false negatives is useless."

      This is Nihilism and it is a destructive memetic virus.

    32. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have an example of the *potential* dangers of ubiquitous facial recognition - China. Filling such databases with junk data is not of any benefit because the systems are automated and self-pruning (e.g. if a face doesn't appear in the environment for over X years, it is deleted. Or, as people grow older, their "child face" is deleted)

      This is why scientists will always beat out artists and politicians in actually doing things, all of the time. It's scientists that made the facial recognition happen in China, not politicians.

    33. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by easyTree · · Score: 1

      The question is, why do politicians control it (or anything, for that matter) as they appear to have no abilities other than those involved in persuading others.

    34. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by easyTree · · Score: 1

      It's a farce enacted by unpleasant people who c should be avoided where possible?

    35. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Not really.

      Current data suggests that America's increased border control in the early 1990s resulted in an increase of 5.8 million resident unauthorized immigrants by 2010, since undocumented migrant workers were coming and going, but then decided to come and stay due to the difficulty and danger of crossing. The numbers piled up.

      More to the point, I'm suggesting that the harmless and banal are impeded by border controls, while the dangerous and destructive are merely inconvenienced. Some speculate this inconvenience turns into a tighter market for drug runners in particular, which develops better-funded and more-militant groups, increasing the damage to our Nation; although that's an unnecessary speculation at this point.

    36. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      China built the Great Wall to stop large military forces, not small and scattered refugees and smugglers. It turns out walls and moats place major invading forces at a significant strategic disadvantage, with a hobbled concentrated force facing a large and mobile concentrated force; whereas scattered individuals are more-difficult to notice, and lower-throughput entries can use constricted covert means like tunnels.

      Border control is not military defense, and we're not building a wall to keep 45,000 Mexicans from marching into Texas with guns and tanks and brigadier generals.

    37. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      It's more that something is about 0% successful against the problem, and minimally successful against a non-problem.

      Think about spending $50 million per year per single violent drug cartel member crossing stopped, while refugees and illegal farm laborers get picked up frequently--yet they still keep coming, and you don't really end up reducing the net flow of harmless illegals into the nation. Meanwhile the violent drug cartels are consolidating, since it takes bigger resources to get around these controls and they have them, and the flow of drugs and guns isn't even dented.

      In the end, you're spending $100 billion each year to put a large rock in front of a river, which splits the river around the rock. The top of the rock gets a little wet, and some of that water evaporates faster under the sun. The river keeps coming.

      You could put those resources to other means and have better outcomes.

    38. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Indeed there are sonograpic equipment combos that find tunnels

      Allegedly.

    39. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by lgw · · Score: 1

      we're not building a wall to keep 45,000 Mexicans from marching into Texas with guns and tanks and brigadier generals.

      There are still 45,000 coming through though, probably each month. How is that not an invasion again? Tanks and generals are not needed now, as 20-30 million people have just walked in without any resistance. We've already taken "open borders" to a historically unprecedented extreme, and I'm for any attempt to control the border even a symbolic one.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    40. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Let's try this again.

      You put up a piece of 10mm hardware cloth at the window to stop things coming into your basement. That's great: no more rodents, leaves, or driftwood.

      Problem: the "things coming into your basement" weren't rodents, leaves, or driftwood; it was water. Hardware cloth doesn't stop water.

      These larger, more-durable physical barriers and sparse policing are good at delaying large, organized invading forces which may try to enter at one to three points simultaneously and cannot sustain attacks except by siege with artillery and encampments. They're loud, visible, and hardly mobile because they need to move as complete units: scattering them is as good as stopping them, since groups of five or ten soldiers unable to regroup into large battalions are no longer a threat and will find themselves captured in short order (or will work to escape enemy territory).

      These larger, more-durable physical barriers are vastly less-effective against scattered, non-organized individuals trying to enter under stealth and only remain hidden. Groups with longer-term goals of establishing a presence and a pipeline--such as drug trafficking--don't need to move a huge, visible force either, and have all the advantages of scattered, non-organized individuals plus the cover of the great mass of those individuals drawing attention away and the organization and resources of large organizations. They come and go in small numbers through covert and temporary channels, develop and apply anti-detection strategies, and operate as loosely-connected networks so that any captures or disruptions have minimal impact on the entire operation.

      You put up a fence to trap leaves and you are fighting water.

    41. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So are white blood cells.

      And they're called "white" -- double points!

    42. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by lgw · · Score: 1

      What bullshit. Fewer people will come across a wall. It won't stop everyone, but it will stop some. "Some" is a good start.

      But you don't care anyhow, you object to the concept of border enforcement, right?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    43. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Why did China build the Great Wall? It didn't 100% keep the Mongols out - the just climbed the wall. But their horses didn't, and it limited the amount of loot that could carry back with them after a raid.

      Why did China build the Great Wall? To keep military forces out.

      Why does Trump want to build a wall? Drug trafficking, murderers, and terrorists, so he claims.

      It won't stop everyone; it will stop some, mostly people who don't make the new, more dangerous route through the desert in search of a better life. It will patently not slow down the drug cartels and the terrorists.

      Why are we talking about building a wall? What do we want to accomplish? It doesn't protect the nation, so it's a waste of resources that could go to better strategies to protect our nation.

    44. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by lgw · · Score: 1

      Embrace the healing power of "and". We build the wall and we do the other things to close the border and remove 30 million illegal aliens from the US.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    45. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      No, you don't.

      You have 100 people. It takes 25 to build and maintain a wall. You build a wall and do something else with 75 other people.

      Sounds great?

      It takes 75 people to operate your regular police force, 25 people to build a wall, and 25 people to perform advanced intelligence and threat tracking and predictive mobilization.

      So you can:

      • Build a wall and have your regular police force fully capable of keeping the general peace, while terrorists and drug lords bypass your wall and have little difficulty avoiding your regular police; or
      • Build a wall and perform advanced threat intelligence to stop terrorists from crossing the border and have your regular police force at 2/3 staff and unable to keep up with what is a growing crime problem; or
      • Have your regular police force fully capable of keeping the peace and perform advanced threat intelligence to stop terrorists and drug lords from crossing the border, efficiently tracking down the ones that do pass so your special task force and regular police can locate and apprehend them even if they slip past at first

      What you cannot do is build a wall and have a full regular police force capable of keeping the peace and perform advanced threat intelligence to stop terrorists and drug lords from effectively operating across your borders.

      You might say, "Well, hire more people." There's a problem here: eventually, you run out of people to hire, funds to pay them, and other resources. If this were untrue, the USSR would have worked, and we would have an infinite population with infinite food, and everyone would have infinite gold. Infinite resources are a violation of causality (yes, time).

      That means eventually you can only do X or Y. You've decided everything else is higher priority than X or Y, so which isn't getting done?

      That means building a useless, ineffective border wall means not doing something else instead. You have 100 things to do; pick 99 of them. You can point at the five you like and say, "Well I want to do all of these"; one of the other 95 is then the thing that can't get done.

      Now here's the best bit: the government does this with taxes. They take your property to provide a government service. An ineffective border wall built in spite of the knowledge that it won't work (or will actually make the situation even worse) is government waste.

      Governments are a social contract: we give up certain natural rights for government to protect other rights and provide for the general welfare. If the government takes excess taxes and wastes that tax money, they are unjustly depriving the governed of their right to property. If the government spends $1 trillion to provide healthcare and it can easily provide that same healthcare for $800 billion--maybe the government isn't operating the bidding process properly--then the government is unjustly depriving the population of $200 billion.

      If the government builds a $100 billion border wall that doesn't keep us any safer and doesn't help our economy, the government is unjustly depriving us of $100 billion.

      They might as well build billion-dollar mansions for politicians.

    46. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by lgw · · Score: 1

      Wall's only a few billion, trivial compared to the economic effect of 30 million people (whether you think that's positive or negative). When you're determined to oppose something, you can always come up with a reason, but the wall is worth it just for the symbolism.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    47. Re:Happy New Year, artsy ladies of Germany by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      trivial compared to the economic effect of 30 million people (whether you think that's positive or negative).

      For certain. My position on the blunt economics of non-dangerous immigrant labor is neutral: they come in, they work, they integrate with the economy. The labor force grows faster when jobs are more available, and a falling unemployment rate and low unemployment numbers corroborate the suggestion that resident immigrant labor is not impacting the economy.

      Each new inflow does compete for jobs; that's a more-complex consideration, since it's not actually efficient (or possible) to slot 100% of job-seeking Americans into each available American job in the entire nation, even as job availability grows, and the competition definitely is direct at higher unemployment rates.

      When you're determined to oppose something, you can always come up with a reason

      Doesn't mean it'll be a good reason.

      but the wall is worth it just for the symbolism.

      It's waste spending, it's expensive to maintain, and it's resources we could direct to more-effective means of keeping us safe from the drug cartels. What if the Government built a $60 billion sculpture of solar panels in the middle of New Mexico and spent $40 billion each year keeping it running, sinking all of the energy into the ground rather than capturing it into the grid, just as a symbol of our commitment to clean energy at a cost of merely $500 billion in the first ten years?

  2. Dumb by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    I am dumber for reading this (and that is pretty hard to do for me). WHen you get a passport, the photo is supposed to resemble you, or the person issuing the passport shouldn't give you one. So either the photo looks like her, or the guy giving out the passport wasn't paying attention. Either way, this is dumb, because you are just setting yourself up for problems down the road when some border control guy doesn't think you look like your passport and won't let you in.

    1. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am dumber for reading this (and that is pretty hard to do for me). WHen you get a passport, the photo is supposed to resemble you, or the person issuing the passport shouldn't give you one. So either the photo looks like her, or the guy giving out the passport wasn't paying attention. Either way, this is dumb, because you are just setting yourself up for problems down the road when some border control guy doesn't think you look like your passport and won't let you in.

      The face looks like her (to a human), but the biometrics don't match very well.

    2. Re: Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it more important for a person to believe that your passport photo looks like you, or for the facial recognition software to do so?

    3. Re:Dumb by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Well hopefully the border control isn't using biometrics to match the photo against the person. I think the next step is to use biometrics to compare the person applying for the passport against the submitted photo. I think I am going to create a system to do just that and make billions (and catch german art ladies).

    4. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is possible that the photo looks similar enough that it'd pass muster from a visual inspection, but be different enough to fool facial recognition software you know.

    5. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it's basically an art project, so there's not gonna be a whole lot of thought into possible repercussions...

    6. Re: Dumb by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      I guess it depends on what is verifying your passport, a person, or software.

    7. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. And the artists probably had to present their ID or previous passport to get the new one, with the biometric database already containing her previous image. Apparently the new image was close enough for the automatic surveillance systems to make a distinction.. ;)

    8. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am dumber for reading this

      That's a common reaction to Vice articles.

  3. Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or at least damage done?

    I mean the point of this was obviously not to harm anyone, but quite the opposite.

    It makes sense that this should not be allowed.
    But it's also not a crime. Not only was nobody damaged, but nobody would have been damaged, and no such thing was intended.

    Ok, ok, I know... In my idealistic reality, yes, but not in the utterly batshit insane world everyone keeps allowing, accepting, enabling and fostering nowadays, as if it was normal. ... Another reason why I own a "It is wrong to be human" t-shirt.

    1. Re:Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      How is applying for a passport with a fake photo not malevolent? The stupidity is spreading.

    2. Re:Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stupidity is spreading.

      \

      This is especially funny considering you've put forward three additional questions here, all of which you'd have the answers to if you knew how to read.

    3. Re:Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      What is funny is how passport/identity stories bring out the incoherent crackpots.

    4. Re:Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by MooseTick · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Shouldn't crime imply malevolence?"

      No. You can still get convicted of manslaughter and have had no intention of doing anything bad.

      And this is basically fraud. She is presenting a photo for a passport and saying it is her when it isn't. I'm sure when you sign to get it you state that everything provided is factual, accurate to your knowledge, and correct. The image is NOT of the woman in question, hence, it is not accurate. Its not of her or even of a real person. You can't talk your way around this.

    5. Re: Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by jd · · Score: 1

      Whilst you are correct, we already differentiate civil offenses from criminal ones, it might be worth debating whether we should have a different, independent, legal code and punishment system for offenses without intent versus those with.

      Compartmentalization is a useful step in reforming how countries like the U.S. deal with crime, as the U.S., China and Australia have some of the least effective systems and it's not possible to deal with the whole thing in one go.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re: Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Define "least effective", please.
      Remember to compensate for different cultures, ethnic make-ups, and neighboring countries in your definition.

    7. Re: Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quickly identified by how "stupid" everyone else are!

    8. Re:Shouldn't crime imply malevolence? by houghi · · Score: 1

      What about a photoshopped image?

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  4. Not the right well to poison. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Seriously, I'm all for well poisoning. But your passport?

    It's not like that's the only, or definitive, picture the government has of you.

    You want to poison government and corporate data wells, but not in a way that flags your record for extra attention.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    1. Re:Not the right well to poison. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have any suggestions you'd care to share?

    2. Re:Not the right well to poison. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Never poison any well under your own identity. Make up a new name, every time.

      Use as much cash as possible. Stay under the radar. Don't go to Defcon.

      Regularly post disinformation, even to pseudo anon accounts like /.

      Lie a lot, just for practice.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Not the right well to poison. by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I follow all those rules. I also make my own soap.

    4. Re:Not the right well to poison. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I follow all those rules. I also make my own soap.

      Yes, but do you use the soap to bath yourself? Using soap on yourself far more important than making it yourself.

    5. Re: Not the right well to poison. by jd · · Score: 1

      I thought everyone used rest these days.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  5. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't be bothered to RTFA, but as near as I can tell they submitted (albeit through fancy hocus pocus digital means) digitally altered images which probably would fool face recognition SW, but not a human being. I mean, I go to get my passport, and I submit my pictures (along, I think, with my gov't issued ID, which also has a picture on it - but it's been a long time since I renewed a passport so I'm not sure) and the person taking the various forms looks at me, and looks at my ID, and presumably looks at my picture, and if those three things don't match in their eyes, I've got a problem. So, congratulations, they've created a photo that looks enough like them that a human doesn't make a fuss. If fooling facial recognition SW was your goal, you could also squint in the photo, or just part your hair the other way - or am I grossly wrong about the "AI" level of facial recognition SW?

  6. Quite late by deiksac · · Score: 1

    A group od czech artists did something similar 8 years ago https://artoftheprank.com/2010...

    1. Re:Quite late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did something similar in High School in 1988. I think Europeans just discovered fake ids.

    2. Re:Quite late by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      A group od czech artists did something similar 8 years ago https://artoftheprank.com/2010...

      It's in TFA

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    3. Re:Quite late by ffkom · · Score: 1

      You had high school ID cards with biometric data derived from your photo on a chip readable via RF? In 1988?

    4. Re:Quite late by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      When I went to college in 1979 the school used our SSN as our student ID. There was a directory you could look in that listed all the students and their ID number. The ID number was used to check books out of the library.

  7. Add drivers licenses, license plates, to that list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Drivers licenses were invented as a means to discriminate against motor vehicle operators and until the late 1960s there were states with no testing requirements. Today drivers licenses are also being utilized (on top of passports) to control peoples movement both inside and outside of countries. The United States on top of individual states target people who have committed or otherwise are accused of various "crimes" by suspending passports and drivers licenses for non-violent "offenses". It should be apparent to everyone whose driven a vehicle that testing doesn't work to make our roads safer. Being able to pass a test does not make one a safe driver. The main things that make someone a safe driver include: Following the protocols of the road, paying attention, etc. You can't solve that with testing.

    License plates may have once been argued as a means of vehicle recovery and as a theft prevention measure. The reality today is they are being used to track people. Both government and non-government entities are persecuting individuals who have done no wrong. Better and more reliable solutions exist today for vehicle recovery such as GPS tracking.

  8. easy enough to fix... by phayes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For passport applications performed in person - change the passport application process so that the picture is taken by the passport delivering authorities - Similar pictures are taken when entering many countries like the U.S. and every European passport already has the passport authorities taking fingerprints.

    For mailed in passport renewal applications, make doctoring the picture cause for revocation, force people to pick up their passports in person and only deliver them if the picture is a close match to the applicant and apply a temporary ban on re-applying for a new passport when people attempting to subvert the process are detected.

    What? This is overly burdensome? Well subverting the utility of passports by doctoring the pictures has a cost too and it seems to me that making sure that MY right to travel isn't being called into question by these idiots is worth some bother.

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    1. Re:easy enough to fix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can thank these shitbags for the constant erosion of rights and privileges. Some idiot fancies themself as "artist" or "penetration tester" and then everyone pays for their stunt.

    2. Re:easy enough to fix... by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 4, Informative

      "every European passport already has the passport authorities taking fingerprints"

      Citation required -- I certainly didn't need to submit fingerprints when my passport was renewed recently.

    3. Re:easy enough to fix... by Anonymice · · Score: 2

      Likewise. It's been at least the best part of a decade, if not more, that the UK has had so called "biometric" passports. From what I can tell, all that really means is they added an RFID & doubled the renewal fees. I've never been asked to give any prints, and until this day, the only places in the UK with any of my biometric records are a couple of datacentres.

    4. Re:easy enough to fix... by phayes · · Score: 1

      You're right. I Confused my foreign wife entering the U.S. (fingerprint & picture) with my French passport renewal.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    5. Re:easy enough to fix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is no "right to travel". In non-totalitarian states you usually have the right to leave the country. The passport is the request from your sovereign (be it a person or a democratically established organ) to other sovereigns to assist, protect and support your safe journey through their territories. If you do not meet the sovereign's criteria for offering such patronage, you are screwed, no passport for you.

    6. Re:easy enough to fix... by jrumney · · Score: 2

      "Biometric" can also mean facial recognition, which they can generate from the photo you send when you apply for the passport. Some countries are collecting fingerprints at the border, but they are checking against their own databases, not against your passport.

    7. Re:easy enough to fix... by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      It is not a completely incorrect confusion - Germany had introduced the biometric passport with fingerprints due to the US threatening Germany to remove it from the visa waiver program otherwise.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    8. Re:easy enough to fix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. I Confused my foreign wife entering the U.S. (fingerprint & picture) with my French passport renewal.

      You have to give fingerprints for a French passport or id card renewal.

    9. Re:easy enough to fix... by houghi · · Score: 1

      Neither did I, but then things change. I got mine 2 years ago. Could well be that it is now a requirement. They also have an RFID chip in the passport I have, so I made a holder of tinfoil and duckttape.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  9. Re:Add drivers licenses, license plates, to that l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know what your driver's test looked like but mine had two phases.. The written part where I demonstrated I had basic knowledge of traffic laws and vehicle operations. Then the practical driving test where I demonstrated a number of basic skills, like staying in my line, making safe right and left turns, backing up while following the necessary traffic laws.

    Driver's tests are designed to verify you have a minimum of proficiency, coordination, mental capacity and skill to handle a vehicle. Which sure sounds like a good idea to me because some folks just are not safe out there even with the tests. The purpose of the tests isn't to control you but to make sure you are capable.

    Your complaint about taking ones driver's license doesn't wash with me. Usually this only involves situations where driving might be impaired, such as DWI convictions, seriously violating the traffic law; demonstrating a level or recklessness that makes you unsafe on the road and the like.

  10. great way to build an id database... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is to setup kiosks for opting out of mass surveillance which get you to upload your own photo. just saying.

  11. The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Passports are tools of oppression"

    Really ?

    "Don't tell me what to do !" "I do what I want !" "You're only trying to stop us from having fun !" "Passports are tools of oppression !"

    Grow the fuck up, stupid libertarian retards. It's called "civilization". The alternatives are tribalism, barbarism and savagery. Take your pick.

    And get off my fucking lawn.

    1. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      "Passports are tools of oppression"

      Really ?

      "Don't tell me what to do !" "I do what I want !" "You're only trying to stop us from having fun !" "Passports are tools of oppression !"

      Grow the fuck up, stupid libertarian retards. It's called "civilization". The alternatives are tribalism, barbarism and savagery. Take your pick.

      And get off my fucking lawn.

      You can have civilization without passports though. Passports aren't necessary to run a nation state. The EU hasn't collapsed without requiring people to show passports at the border. Britain left- but that's only because Britain is en route to becoming the rednecks of Europe with people like Farage and Johnson leading the trailers.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, you need to evaluate what is truly necessary for civilization. "Papers, please" is not one of them.

      Captcha: Patriot

    3. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We could have a world with open borders and no passports that works well. All it would require is automated sentry guns trained to shoot at anything brown and person shaped that is trying to cross into europe or other developed parts. This would be an exmple of AI being used to preserve our security and freedoms, but without mass surveillance or privacy violations.

    4. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason free travel works in europe is because theoretically the outer states check you on entry.
      Even the worst third world shithole has a passport so they can kick your rich ass out if you aren't welcome anymore.

    5. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      "Passports are tools of oppression"

      Really ?

      Yes, that statement is really ironic as one half of Germany remembers very well when NOT giving you a passport was actual opression.

      --
      bickerdyke
    6. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is: You leave us no choice to take a pick. You are forcing us into your views of "civilization". What if I like tribalism? Let it be.

    7. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, I come from a non-English speaking country and I sometimes have difficulties understanding others. It sounded to me like you hate mommy and daddy and when YOU grow up, you will eat ALL the ice cream and NEVER brush your teeth. Because you're a BIG boy.

      Anyway, I live in the Mideast; plenty of tribalism to go around here. Wanna trade?

    8. Re:The world is rules by fucking 10-year olds by Cederic · · Score: 1

      So you're ok with 40 million Egyptians, 20 million Canadians, Australians and South Africans and 250 million Americans all turning up to live in Holland?

      It's going to get cosy.

  12. I like this ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... and advocated back in the day when Facebook got uptight about, Merged Women and oh wait ...

    It was about photos showing breasts.

    Down went Breast Feeding Moms, Breast Cancer, Breast self-checks ... you name it.

    A bunch of us encouraged any and all Facebook members to post breast pictures wrapped in art or social issues but Facebook pulled out early.

    I was glad, but some women had a problem with it on another level.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  13. Advantages and disadvantages of unrecognizability by XXongo · · Score: 2

    The face looks like her (to a human), but the biometrics don't match very well.

    Well hopefully the border control isn't using biometrics to match the photo against the person.

    Where the biometrics is going to come in is when the Border Patrol uses biometrics to compare the person traveling to the photo on the passport, to verify that the person on the passport is actually the person traveling.

    Basically, the question here is whether she will be able to travel using that digitally-altered passport.

    The advantage to her is that if passport photos are sent to a government database of faces that is distributed to facial-recognition systems (say, looking at images from security cameras), she won't be recognized, and thus her movements won't be picked up and tracked.

  14. Quite a ruse if I must say so by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1
    So let me get this straight: you want me to protest and act out against government surveillance programs by providing some website with a picture of myself?
    What, you're not going to ask me for my drivers license, social security number, credit card info, and bank account info, too?

    Totally legit

  15. How to get murdered in three easy steps by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    The photo is half her, half Federica Mogherini, an Italian politician who is the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

    Wow, doesn't seem like a smart idea to present ID wherever you travel that will hit with relatively high confidence on image recognition databases that may be looking for a high level EU representative on security policy at loose ends with no security detail...

    Sounds in fact like a great way to be disappeared and show up on grainy videos later with people who are not very big fans of the EU.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  16. Passport Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So did they put down Tuvix as a name on the passport?

  17. Jokes on her by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your passport is the only thing that proves you have the right to be in Germany.
    Just wait until you are on vacation and they arrest you for identity theft because the picture doesn't match you and you get thrown in a prison in Thailand.

  18. This has been done before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was done in 2010 in Czechia.
    https://artoftheprank.com/2010/06/19/ztohoven-art-collective-launch-citizen-k-identity-swap/

  19. Stop the presses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop the presses. Fraudulent documents pass as real. And dog bites man.

  20. In 40 yrs, Germans will understand .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 40 yrs, Germans will understand what their current decisions have done to their culture and lifestyle.

    Too bad it will be too late at that point.

    If everywhere in the world had a similar level of income as Germans enjoy, then I'd agree that passports aren't necessary. But I live in the real world, not some idealized version of it.

    Imagine millions people all coming to Germany without jobs, few skills, and they don't speak either Germany or English. They are permanent residents. What's next? You either take them in and convert them to the German work-ethic and culture while teaching them German, but many people won't be able or will choose not to make that change. They will demand social welfare for the rest of their lives. Their children will learn that life and expect it too.

    Germans are a practical group, so perhaps they will force some social agreements onto aid recipients that other countries won't.

    In all the history of Germany, there have never been more immigrants than today at about 10M foreign born. That's about 12% of the population.
    My grandparents were immigrants FROM Germany. I have a love of immigrants who come and make a better life for themselves, their families and their communities. Welcome. I also love the blending of cultures, together we are all better and much more interesting.

    I would also encourage every immigrant family to speak both their native language AND the local language of where you live. Language is a huge part of culture. My family all learned German, but we didn't speak it at home. I regret that.

  21. Funny until you use it by manu0601 · · Score: 2

    This is funny until a software at the border decides this is not you on the passport photo.

    At that point, at best you spend the whole day explaining what is going on to custom officers.

    1. Re:Funny until you use it by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      That's gonna happen half of the times.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:Funny until you use it by xlsior · · Score: 2

      This is funny until a software at the border decides this is not you on the passport photo.

      At that point, at best you spend the whole day explaining what is going on to custom officers.


      Or worse: If you happen to lose your passport while abroad, the embassy won't issue you replacement travel papers because you can't identify yourself and you don't match the info they have on file. And without that passport or emergency travel papers, you won't even be able to board your flight home. Potentially ever.

      So good luck with that -- you could really screw yourself over by messing with those records.

    3. Re: Funny until you use it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just dont get art!

  22. The German Perspective. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

    Germans know things about border controls. They invented the modern border wall with motion sensors and death strips.

    The country was divided. Remember?

    The East spied on people in depth, blackmailing and controlling them to spy on family members, friends and neighbours. They did this with conventional technology. Identity papers were important and often a matter of a life worth living, or death to escape it.

    This has left a pension for provocative artwork, a deep respect for privacy and a healthy fear of government overreach.

    1. Re:The German Perspective. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has left a pension for provocative artwork...

      A pension? Did you mean penchant?

    2. Re:The German Perspective. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Derp, yeah, I meant a pension. They have piles of loot laying about from dead people and they use it to buy up provocative artwork.

      Of course I meant penchant.

  23. Re:Advantages and disadvantages of unrecognizabili by dryeo · · Score: 1

    The advantage to her is that if passport photos are sent to a government database of faces that is distributed to facial-recognition systems (say, looking at images from security cameras), she won't be recognized, and thus her movements won't be picked up and tracked.

    Exactly, there's also a good chance she isn't planning on traveling anywhere where a passport is required.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  24. i am shocked by houghi · · Score: 1

    Somebody does not look exactely like her passport photo? I am shocked.

    I looked at the article, but could not find the two images. I assume they look somewhat similar. U know people who photoshopped their pasport photo. So are they guilty as well?

    This is seriously a non-story. So it is not her, it is a representation of her and it looked good enough.

    Here how I get my passporrt photo. I go to a photographer that taked a picture digitally, changes the background, as I need a different one than the photobooth have, print it out so it can be scanned.

    Why not have a digital camera and do it all in one swoop?

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  25. Car has tongue by easyTree · · Score: 1

    No, I'm Billie Hoffman!

    +1 to this whole idea.

  26. Who did they harm, let alone intend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hm? Do tell me, you dumb fuck!

    You're so mentally retarded, you believe you are smart.

    I bet you are so dumb, you actually believe you vote.

  27. Who got harmed? Let alone intended. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hm? Please do tell us.

    You are so mentally disabled, that you believe you are smart again.

    I bet you are *so* stupid, you even believe you voted.

  28. And such laws are a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As I said: We live in a hellish nightmare where infinite stupidity and infinite evilness meet.

    Such "laws" might exist in idotic draconian countries. Doesn't make it OK.

  29. Re:Advantages and disadvantages of unrecognizabili by Cederic · · Score: 1

    UK airports are using passport scanners instead of border guards as you land. Those are using biometrics, and do fail on photographs intended to subvert them.

    The fall-back process is to route the passenger through to a border guard. They can look at the photograph, confirm that it matches the person stood in front of them, and allow them into the country.

    So the photograph wont prevent her from travelling, just delay her at border control.

  30. Re:Add drivers licenses, license plates, to that l by sjames · · Score: 1

    The test is not without merit, but it doesn't really tell us much other than that the person is able to handle a car going 15 MPH with no traffic when they know they're being watched.

    But yes, many states will suspend a license for reasons unrelated to driving, such as failure to appear in court, late child support, non DUI/DWI drug offenses, etc. Further, why does it expire? You can renew without taking a test again. Most of the time they don't even bother with the token vision test in Ga anymore.

  31. Re:Advantages and disadvantages of unrecognizabili by XXongo · · Score: 1

    UK airports are using passport scanners instead of border guards as you land. Those are using biometrics, and do fail on photographs intended to subvert them. The fall-back process is to route the passenger through to a border guard. They can look at the photograph, confirm that it matches the person stood in front of them, and allow them into the country.

    So the photograph wont prevent her from travelling,

    ...if the altered photo is enough like her that the human thinks they're the same even if the AI doesn't.

    depends, I suppose, on how similar to her is the other person whose image she mixed in with hers to make the composite.

    just delay her at border control.

  32. How is that possible? by juancn · · Score: 1
    Are German passwords that insecure?

    I'm Argentinian, not the top of the pack in terms of government competency, but to get a passport I have to be physically there and they take my picture and fingerprints. You cannot submit your own picture, that's a glaring security hole. They authenticate your identity first and then capture the picture.

    Even the camera operators cannot override the input from the camera, at least not easily.