Slashdot Mirror


One of the Biggest At-Home DNA Testing Companies Is Working With the FBI (buzzfeednews.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from BuzzFeed News: Family Tree DNA, one of the largest private genetic testing companies whose home-testing kits enable people to trace their ancestry and locate relatives, is working with the FBI and allowing agents to search its vast genealogy database in an effort to solve violent crime cases, BuzzFeed News has learned. Federal and local law enforcement have used public genealogy databases for more than two years to solve cold cases, including the landmark capture of the suspected Golden State Killer, but the cooperation with Family Tree DNA and the FBI marks the first time a private firm has agreed to voluntarily allow law enforcement access to its database. While the FBI does not have the ability to freely browse genetic profiles in the library, the move is sure to raise privacy concerns about law enforcement gaining the ability to look for DNA matches, or more likely, relatives linked by uploaded user data.

The Houston-based company, which touts itself as a pioneer in the genetic testing industry and the first to offer a direct-to-consumer test kit, disclosed its relationship with the FBI to BuzzFeed News on Thursday, saying in a statement that allowing access "would help law enforcement agencies solve violent crimes faster than ever." While Family Tree does not have a contract with the FBI, the firm has agreed to test DNA samples and upload the profiles to its database on a case-by-case basis since last fall, a company spokesperson told BuzzFeed News. Its work with the FBI is "a very new development, which started with one case last year and morphed," she said. To date, the company has cooperated with the FBI on fewer than 10 cases. The Family Tree database is free to access and can be used by anyone with a DNA profile to upload, not just paying customers.

106 comments

  1. FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They don't need your DNA, just someone close to you in the family tree, and they'll basically have your DNA as well.

    1. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by godel_56 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They don't need your DNA, just someone close to you in the family tree, and they'll basically have your DNA as well.

      What you mean is they don't need the perpetrator of the crime to have been tested by Family Tree DNA, they just need your sample collected at the crime scene to match for distant relatives.

      Articles about the discovery of the Golden State killer suggested that third to fifth cousins would be about the sweet spot for getting a match. Any further back and there are too many possible suspects and any earlier then you may not get a match at all.

      Once you've found a distant relative then the information is given to a genealogist who works forward to narrow the field down to one or two suspects. After that they follow the suspects around and pick up discarded drink cans, straws, condoms etc. to get test for a definitive match.

    2. Re: FBI hoarding DNA data by Vihai · · Score: 1

      This is not a crazy conspiracy theory because it is at all reasonable that authorities would do their best to have access to such data.

      Other conspiracy theories are crazy because they are based on unreasonable hypothesis and only deluded people would believe them (all of them, probably).

      Of course, it you're one of those you will not be able to see the difference. That's part of the problem.

    3. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 2

      Third or fourth cousin match means the FBI has ballpark 100 living possible suspects at the outset. Probably 90 can be eliminated as too unlikely by a cursory investigation while sitting behind a desk. Then they can look carefully at the records of the 10, to see which are the most promising and worth a real investigation.

      DNA records of ~1 million random Americans, and I bet the FBI can track down 99% of the people whose families have lived in this country for a few generations, based on a single strand of hair at a crime scene.

      Of course, there is real detective work to be done, when your careful combing finds the hair strands from 100 different people at a crime scene. No guarantee the perp actually dropped a hair either.

      Even without this Family Tree data, the FBI will eventually get the data it wants by just collecting data from suspects who are indicted for crimes that suggest a sample is appropriate -- it will only take longer. The portion of the population who has one convicted sexual predator amongst their one thousand closest relatives is going to be ninety something per cent pretty quickly, as this data gets accumulated.

    4. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Koby77 · · Score: 2

      Is there any chance of organizing a campaign to poison the database? Get people to send in DNA samples, but label it with the wrong person/address? And what happens if you send in blood from a different species?

    5. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by J053 · · Score: 1

      You'd be better off figuring out how to sell DNA obfuscation kits to criminals - a bunch of dandruff flakes, skin cells, and hair from multiple different people that can be spread around the crime scene. I haven't figured out a good delivery mechanism yet, but just shaking out a ziploc bag would probably work.

    6. Re: FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't just do geaneology with DNA. You use it to identify psychopathological genetic markers. Then you use that info to trace relatives.

      People thinking the FBI is just using the info to connect relatives are woefully naive.

    7. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by dissy · · Score: 4, Informative

      They don't need your DNA, just someone close to you in the family tree, and they'll basically have your DNA as well.

      What you mean is they don't need the perpetrator of the crime to have been tested by Family Tree DNA, they just need your sample collected at the crime scene to match for distant relatives.

      What you mean is they don't need your DNA at all, they let Family Tree DNA pick a random name out of a hat and then focus the investigation you, ala Salem Witch Trial style.

      It was only two weeks ago Slashdot posted this article: https://science.slashdot.org/story/19/01/18/2253228/identical-twins-test-5-dna-ancestry-kits-get-different-results-on-eac
      Two identical twins "bought home kits from AncestryDNA, MyHeritage, 23andMe, FamilyTreeDNA and Living DNA, and mailed samples of their DNA to each company for analysis"

      The tests all showed them as non-matches and some showed them as unrelated, even though they are identical twins from the same parents.

      So it isn't even possible for the FBI *using this DNA data* to narrow down anything, they are literally getting random peoples names and any successful detective work was in spite of the contradicting DNA data, not because of it.

    8. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Xenx · · Score: 1

      You still need to come up with the right "tobacco pipe" reason to sell the kits legally.

    9. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is illegal about selling ziploc bags of dandruff.

    10. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 0

      Then they can look carefully at the records of the 10, to see which are the most promising and worth a real investigation.

      Usually it is even easier than that. 8 of 10 live in another state. The 9th lives in a different city. The 10th is the murder victim's ex-boyfriend with a restraining order.

    11. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For once being adopted in a province that watches adoptees die of preventable inherited diseases due to fucked up anti-disclosure laws has its privileges. In my case it would be impossible to actually figure it out, since my full name was changed to a serial number, and then changed to my current name by my adoptive parents.

      Good luck finding me through DNA!!!

    12. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's awesome. Now if only they'd get around to dealing with the massive backlog of DNA evidence instead of trying to ensnare even more people. I mean, I know they're working on it but when we're not seeing anything indicating that the curve is bending downward even with grants to state and local governments, it seems we should focus harder on that first.

    13. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      No AC it gets the FBI down the family tree. They can do police work from the DNA result.
      Then find the person to test.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    14. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of hair at a barber shop.

    15. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually missing the roots.

    16. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You mean like a random chimp or a pig?

      Hm, do you want me to feel insulted?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    17. Re: FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Though wasting their time with false samples is a strategy.
      Though most will be cut, there might be some with roots as barbers and hairdressers do comb hair.
      Also you might look into senior homes where old people are taken care of. Though that might quickly dry up with enough samples.
      Another would be foreign sources who are not in the databases and who's relatives will also probably not do such kits.
      Seeing as India et al have a large hair industry, that might be a good source.

    18. Re: FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And its not like the cops would use faulty evidence to pressure people into false confessions..

    19. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Faulty evidence is indeed a problem but it is important to note that that whole ancestry testing thing is kind of sketchy to begin with whereas DNA matching between two specific samples is much more straightforward and reliable.

      I think there are two horror scenarios. First is you get cops/feds on your doorstep asking you a bunch of questions and hassling you because some fifth cousin you didn't even know existed committed a crime.

      Second, and this is the worse one, this reaches this point where they're just shotgun testing every DNA sample found at a scene and because you threw away a coffee cup in the same place a murderer threw away his, now you're a person of interest and your life is turned upside down.

    20. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      What you mean is they don't need your DNA at all, they let Family Tree DNA pick a random name out of a hat and then focus the investigation you, ala Salem Witch Trial style.

      It was only two weeks ago Slashdot posted this article: https://science.slashdot.org/story/19/01/18/2253228/identical-twins-test-5-dna-ancestry-kits-get-different-results-on-eac
      Two identical twins "bought home kits from AncestryDNA, MyHeritage, 23andMe, FamilyTreeDNA and Living DNA, and mailed samples of their DNA to each company for analysis"

      The tests all showed them as non-matches and some showed them as unrelated, even though they are identical twins from the same parents.

      Did you read the bleeping article?

      The article was about ethnic ancestries.

      And only some of the companies had wildly different results.

      Some did not. Ancestry and MyHeritageDNA were pretty close.

      Identical twins do not have identical DNA. Without knowing how the companies calculate these percentages, a one or two percentage point difference in ethnic ancestries is not a surprise.

      And nowhere does the article say the twins were unrelated. Even the sampled data from 23andme was 99.6% identical. They just messed up the ethnic ancestry profiles.

      The article also does not say anything about FamilyTreeDNA other than to say the twins submitted DNA to FamilyTreeDNA which didn't give identical ethnic ancestry profiles, and that FTDNA reported Middle Eastern ancestry (for both) which was not consistent with family oral history.

      The message of the story is that these operations are wrong about ethnic ancestries. That's no surprise. And the fact that they report ethnic ancestries that conflicts with family oral history is also no surprise.

      The methodology used for these ethnic ancestries is far from perfect. They may be working with probabilities of genetic markers being found in one identified group vs. other identified groups, data gaps in their "ethnicity" databases, limitations of consumer-grade DNA sequencing, and so on.

      Don't read anything more into the article than exactly what it says.

      Also, for anybody who's using these companies to help with their geneology research, they're one tool among many and the results are used in a greater context, with substantiating evidence. Or the results are used to point in the certain direction or to improve verification of other research, operating on a probability basis.

      In the current legal system, people won't be convicted by DNA found in FamilyTreeDNA. That's one of the starting points for law enforcement, not the end.

      Privacy concerns notwithstanding, I'd be a helluva lot more concerned about false convictions due to legal system bias (racial, financial, etc.) and poor use of DNA technology (misuse of touch DNA results, DNA contamination in the lab, etc.) than whatever the FBI will learn with FTDNA.

    21. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by SylvesterTheCat · · Score: 2

      The 10th is the murder victim's ex-boyfriend with a restraining order.

      If that is the case, then that information should have been discovered in a ... what's the term... hmmm... traditional investigation?
      DNA is not required to discover that information and identify a possible suspect.

    22. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Identical twins do not have identical DNA.

      The fuck are you talking about? They literally do. In fact, they went to an expert who tested their DNA and told them that it was identical.

    23. Re: FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not a crazy conspiracy theory because it is at all reasonable that authorities would do their best to have access to such data.

      Yeah! Once the government has sufficient DNA profiles of all the criminals and potential criminals, they can use algorithms to identify persons of interest in the general population that happen to have a genetic pre-disposition towards committing crime. Then they can preemptively capture those individuals and lock them up before they cause any problems for all the innocent, law abiding sheeple. It's going to be so awesome!

    24. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by mlyle · · Score: 1

      No, but murder victim's sketchy ex-boyfriend who did DV once to someone else is not enough to get a search warrant or require him to provide DNA. And there might be 10 people in the victim's past and relations that have some kind of reason for minor suspicion. Too many dead ends to investigate in depth, and not enough cause to forcibly collect DNA samples from them.

      Then you have a familial DNA match-- you find the person who is closest related to the actual criminal, and then there's 1000 people in the world who are the right relation distance away. Of whom 12 live in the surrounding areas. And the intersection of these 12 and the other 10 people yields one person. Suddenly it's worth sneaking around to collect that dude's DNA or getting a court order.

    25. Re: FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other conspiracy theories are crazy because they are based on unreasonable hypothesis and only deluded people would believe them (all of them, probably).

      You're so right. The very idea that there are groups of people that secretly conspire to achieve hidden agendas that I don't know anything about is obviously paranoid delusion!
      This fact proves that none of the following exist in any form...

      Intelligence services
      Organized crime
      Pedophile rings
      Religious cults
      Secret societies

      Luckily the world is just full of people like me that float through life in a care free manner. To think otherwise is ridiculous!
      Organizations like the MAFIA, the Yakuza, the Triads, motorbike gangs, the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, Mossad etc. are all fictional.

    26. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Identical twins do not have identical DNA

      Hahaha...too funny. You had a nice big spiel and it's all based on your complete ignorance.

    27. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they do not. Over their lifetimes, they have different mutations.

      Twin DNA test: Why identical criminals may no longer be safe
      https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25371014

      Identical twins have identical DNA at the moment the fertilized egg cell divides into two embryos. After that, at some point, they'll develop different mutations.

      That being said, DNA sequencing errors might produce more differences than the underlying mutations.

    28. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Complete ignorance of what?

      About identical twins not having identical DNA?

      That's not ignorance. It's fact.

      Twin DNA test: Why identical criminals may no longer be safe
      https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25371014

      The "nice big spiel" is also based on the non-ignorance of the fact that DNA sequencing has some kinduva error rate even in serious research, that a lot of DNA sequencing does not sequence the entirety of someone's DNA, and that "ethnic ancestries" -- the focus of the CBC article about the identical twins -- can sometimes be based on probabilities.

    29. Re:FBI hoarding DNA data by SylvesterTheCat · · Score: 1

      No, but murder victim's sketchy ex-boyfriend who did DV once to someone else is not enough to get a search warrant or require him to provide DNA.

      I would still say that it is not necessary to jump straight to a search warrant or try to do DNA comparison.
      How about.. talking to him / her? If a suspect is willing to provide information about their location, let them. There is also the possibility they may have information they don't already know about the victim that would be useful.

      The investigators should be looking for evidence that excludes a suspect as well as evidence that connects a suspect.
      If the suspect was out of town on a work trip or vacation or whatever... that would mean that they need to look elsewhere.
      No search warrant or DNA required for that one.

  2. BuzzFeed? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    Are those guys still around?

    1. Re:BuzzFeed? by novakyu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe they learned to code.

    2. Re:BuzzFeed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LAWL look at the edgy guy here, thinking he knows all about what's popular on the internet. He's soooooo smart, keeping up with the times and whatnot. My non-existent panties are completely wet right now.

    3. Re:BuzzFeed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buzzfeed News is a separate outlet than Buzzfeed.

    4. Re:BuzzFeed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh SHIT, watch out, the learned how to make a GUI in Visual Basic.
      You're dead now son. Dead meat! They gonna dox your ass to the heavens and beyond!

  3. This is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wait till they start monetizing their databases by selling them to random companies and quasi-law enforcement types.

  4. When will people ever learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember all the way back to when MySpace first appeared. Being of the 'older' generation, I asked some people why they would put all this personal information out on the internet for everyone to see. None of them seemed to have any qualms about it at the time. Eventually, after Facebook took over, I noticed more and more people setting their profiles to private and I figured the 'younger' generation was getting a clue about privacy.

    Fast forward to today; how long have these DNA testing companies existed. The same question arises, why would you give your DNA 'information' to these companies with no ifs, ands, or buts? Privacy starts at home people! If you want to keep something private, don't give it away.

    Facebook, Google, shopping clubs, DNA tests -- what next big thing will come along for people to willingly hand over an FBI dossier worth of information to whomever comes along with a shiny new toy?

    1. Re:When will people ever learn? by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That I will be prosecuted for a crime where my DNA shows up at a crime scene, based on fourth cousins spitting into a 23andme family pact for Christmas fun seems not all that important to most people.

      However, that the insurance companies will profile my family and decide I am a high risk based on my cousins, that seems like a scary and very real possibility. At least to me. What can I do about that?

    2. Re:When will people ever learn? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3

      However, that the insurance companies will profile my family and decide I am a high risk based on my cousins, that seems like a scary and very real possibility. At least to me. What can I do about that?

      Vote for candidates that support universal single-payer healthcare.

      Canadian version of Breaking Bad

    3. Re:When will people ever learn? by N1AK · · Score: 1

      You're slightly missing the point here; you could never share your personal information or DNA with anyone, and still end up with it being known because other people share the information or share their DNA (voluntarily or not) which provides insight into your DNA. The issue with a lot of this is that if you can't persuade almost everyone then you're fucked even if you yourself don't go along; and being realistic means you aren't going to persuade almost everyone.

    4. Re:When will people ever learn? by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      Vote for candidates that support universal single-payer healthcare.

      Note: that's different from "something terrific"?
      Who knew?

  5. Obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you thought your data was safe from the grubby hands of the FBI, you're wrong.
    You can't trust any US companies to not be working with the US gov and law enforcement. Especially the ones where you willingly give them your DNA. It's a treasure trove of data sample for them, of course they will go get them.

    1. Re:Obviously by schwit1 · · Score: 1

      How do we know this is voluntary on the part Family Tree DNA or that it is only Family Tree DNA?

      This could be the genetics version of Prism.

  6. they won't stop till they know everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My opinion..
    Between DNA, wiretapping, encryption, psy profiling, bugging, bank records, fMRI lie detectors (not yet invented, but trying!), etc.. they will never stop, because what it is fundamentally covet is the knowledge of God. Sure they will claim it is for the best interest of society, but I would wager a good number of them are just desperate control freaks. And a hand full are insecure police boys with anger issues who think their girlfriend is cheating on them... that is why they need to read her phone's texts, geo track her car, and run background checks on anyone she associates with.

    Also, never once have I heard of a any politician or magistrate claim they wish they had the wisdom of God.

  7. False positives by Daemonik · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fun story.. crime labs were seeing the same DNA strand all over various crime sites and authorities thought they had a massive serial killer case brewing before they tracked the traces back to a person who worked the machinery that makes the swabs the police use to collect evidence.

    The problem with these sorts of drag nets isn't just the privacy implications, which are huge in their own right, but the inevitable false positives that will land people in prison facing DA's who will fight tooth and nail to prevent that conviction from being overturned. Police today aren't trained to have the skills to investigate past the first reasonable suspect and just keep banging on them until they cave and "confess" or are irrefutably ruled out.

    We need police and prosecutorial reform as much as we need a tightening of privacy laws.

    1. Re:False positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fun story.. crime labs were seeing the same DNA strand all over various crime sites and authorities thought they had a massive serial killer case brewing before they tracked the traces back to a person who worked the machinery that makes the swabs the police use to collect evidence.

      then that wasn't a false positive. It is correctly identified DNA, what it was is a polluted crime scene/equipment. The DNA results were 100% correct.

    2. Re:False positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was a false positive for matching with a serial killer though.

    3. Re:False positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      crime labs were seeing the same DNA strand all over various crime sites and authorities thought they had a massive serial killer case brewing before they tracked the traces back to a person who worked the machinery that makes the swabs the police use to collect evidence.

      Yeah, I remember that episode, too.

    4. Re:False positives by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      False positives is 100% correct. Two completely unrelated people can have the same DNA signature (not complete genome, just a set of markers they test for) and so searching for matching DNA is like searching for someone with matching hair color, eye color, skin tone, height, weight and so on. The best these DNA databases can do is generate leads. If you're ever on a jury for a trial with DNA evidence, don't let the prosecutor tell you otherwise.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    5. Re:False positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two completely unrelated people can have the same DNA signature (not complete genome

      Bullshit. The odds of that happening are astronomically tiny for a full 20-locus CODIS result. That's why they have 20 loci in a standard CODIS result.

    6. Re: False positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is loosly based on a real event in Germany and neighboring countries like many episodes of that and other shows.

    7. Re:False positives by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually those markers always have strong overlaps with one out of random 30 people on the planet.
      If you find a match, there are literally something like 240,000,000 potential matches. Of course you can filter them out by match of race, blood type etc and narrow it to perhaps 300, but thats it.
      Keep in mind humans and chimps are 96% identically: https://www.genome.gov/1551509...

      Basing evidence or proof on "high variable" random DNA is possible, if you have 3 possible culprits, and one of the three has a matching DNA ... it is a pointless witch hunt if you only have culprits and wand to screen the society via an DNA data base (at least today).

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    8. Re:False positives by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      Ok that's good because until 2017, they used only 13 loci and it was far more likely to find a false match than the FBI claimed. Even with 20 loci, the statistics can be abused when dealing with DNA fragments.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    9. Re:False positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TIME: Germany's Phantom Serial Killer: A DNA Blunder
      http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1888126,00.html

    10. Re:False positives by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      I actually do genetic matching, and have worked for Family Tree DNA. I can tell you that it is not at all possible for two unrelated people to be considered a "match," unless you are talking about very old tests that match only 12 data points.

      Modern tests, including FTDNA's autosomal test, compares more than 700,000 markers. Thousands of these markers (SNPs) in a row must match, in order to be called a "match."

      It is true that this method is still based on statistical probabilities, but the difference between unrelated people and related people is stark, when viewing these results. They not only can show whether two people are related, but also how closely they are related.

  8. Well, I'm screwed by Snotnose · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have a sister that is 100% into facebook (yeah, fuck you spell check, I'm not gonna capitalize that). She posts family pictures, tagging me, even after I've asked her not to. She's also sent her DNA to at least one company, and I suspect all of them.

    The problem? Dad had 14 siblings, mom 8. What are the odds one of my relatives is an asshole? I'm guessing pretty much 100%. So now I have the FBI looking at me. Never mind the worst thing I've done is 80 MPH on the freeway.

    The real problem? Suppose one of my relatives is a major asshat, my DNA matches enough that I get arrested. Now I have to spend hundreds of thousands for a lawyer, only to hopefully get the case tossed out of court. Can I sue the FBI for my legal fees? Yeah, you haven't been paying attention. I'm fucked, if lucky I have the money for the lawyer. Otherwise I could be on trial for shit I never did against a government agency with no budget.

    1. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 2

      The real problem? Suppose one of my relatives is a major asshat, my DNA matches enough that I get arrested.

      Realistically, you may get investigated because of your criminal cousin, but when it actually comes to time to indict, you can spit into a cup and it will show your DNA definitely does not match the strand of hair at the crime scene.

      They are guessing about you based on family background. They are not really guessing about the DNA of the sample they found at the crime scene. If you provide a DNA sample, that should clear things up.

      But, yes, this may well cost you four figures. But probably not the five or six figures of a full trial.

    2. Re: Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this any different than innocent people matching a sketchy (not dna) profile and lacking a strong alibi getting dragged through the courts?

      At least further DNA testing can rule you out, but good luck if you are 5 6 with a beard driving a pickup and canâ(TM)t prove where you were last Thursday.

    3. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are guessing about you based on family background. They are not really guessing about the DNA of the sample they found at the crime scene. If you provide a DNA sample, that should clear things up.

      A few years ago there was a rape cold-case where the police asked everyone in a village of 8000 men to have their DNA tested (Belgium maybe, not relevant enough to look up. It was covered on slashdot). Out of those 8000, two perfectly matched. One of them luckily confessed.

      Know what the false-positive rate is? One in 4000. The confessor probably did not know that, but the police did. Now I'd imagine with relatives the false positive has a couple zeroes knocked off of it.

      Can you defend yourself when you are pitted against another? Both your DNA match. Both were around the area. You were innocent that day and have no records. The guilty party has had plenty of time to work up alibis and prepare for this situation you are going into blind.

      Don't think this doesn't happen. The innocence project and others have managed to secure the release of many black men. Are you willing to risk sitting in jail for a few decades because you think providing a sample will "clear things up?"

    4. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you provide a DNA sample, that should clear things up.

      Yeah, unless they take samples and then say they came from the crime scene.

        CAPTCHA: murdered

    5. Re: Well, I'm screwed by ldsviking · · Score: 1

      Generally speaking, no competent genealogical DNA analysis will suggest that you're the perpetrator, even if the crime scene DNA was from someone as close as a parent or child. Even in that case, only half of the genealogically significant DNA would be a match. They would immediately want to know who your parents and kids are, since the analysis would clearly point to one of them, but the difference to your DNA would be obvious. The main exception would be a case of identical twins, who do match 100% theoretically. Matching autosomal DNA relationship stats: https://isogg.org/wiki/Autosom...

    6. Re: Well, I'm screwed by pilaftank · · Score: 2

      Generally speaking, no competent genealogical DNA analysis...

      Hmmm, according to the Houston Chronicle that's going to be a problem:

      Scores of pending criminal cases and past convictions could be in jeopardy in the wake of revelations that a former Houston Police crime lab technician resigned after an internal investigation found evidence of lying, improper procedure and tampering with an official record.

      https://www.houstonchronicle.c...

      --
      dna.js
    7. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      What are the odds one of my relatives is an asshole? I'm guessing pretty much 100%. So now I have the FBI looking at me.

      Sounds like you're receiving all the benefits - paranoia, etc - without them even giving two shits about you.

      Too much caffeine? Switch from sativa to indica??

    8. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Username checks out. Rant reads like a 13-year-old who doesn't understand how DNA or science works.

    9. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The chances of you having an alibi that proves you were nowhere the crime scene must be very high as well.

    10. Re: Well, I'm screwed by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      That's an awful lot of panic for something that hasn't actually happened yet.

      --
      -Styopa
    11. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only if they'll immediately remove said sample from their databases after proving innocence, anything else is sickening.

    12. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the odds one of my relatives is an asshole? I'm guessing pretty much 100%

      I'm pretty sure at least one of your parent's children is an asshole.

    13. Re:Well, I'm screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spitting into a cup isn't likely to make the FBI go away. Remember the Atlanta Olympics? The guy who found the bomb because the prime suspect because of simply proximity. Even if the FBI doesn't think you did it, they are going to think that you know did and they aren't going to go away until you tell them who.

  9. More fun tech for the hammer. by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1

    So is there a little room in the basement with a little man coming up with neat new ideas for law enforcement to try out? It seems every couple of weeks there is a new headline about some shiny new tech the fuzz has leveraged, and then you hear nothing else about it.

    They stop talking about it because it's an embarrassing failure?
    They stop talking about it because it works too good?
    They stop talking about it because they forgot about it?
    They stop talking about it because they all know it's illegal and wont stand to constitutional scrutiny?

    At this rate, I imagine some room full of tech gizmos and computers that nobody know how to use.

    --
    You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
    1. Re:More fun tech for the hammer. by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      They stop talking about it because it's an embarrassing failure?

      The news stops talking about it because the hoopla and hysteria die down after everyone realizes the story was only written to get clickthroughs to the advertisers on the news website, and they've posted the next sensational story of hypothetical outrageous dangers intended to grab everyone's attention.

      The job of "news" is to provide people to the advertisers. That's why nobody ever sees the page 7 retraction of a front page story about the latest outrage -- nobody buys papers or goes to websites to read retractions.

    2. Re:More fun tech for the hammer. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The job of "news" is to provide people to the advertisers. That's why nobody ever sees the page 7 retraction of a front page story about the latest outrage -- nobody buys papers or goes to websites to read retractions.

      How's about a law requiring retractions to be on the same page, and in the same section, that the head of the original article was on? That would go a long way towards encouraging stricter fact-checking. Sure, the media needs protection from the government, but the people also need protection from the media.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. interested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course Im interested in 23andMe and the like, but until there are protections in place, NO WAY Im giving that info up freely (or ... paying for it I guess) and this is exactly why.

    1. Re:interested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course Im interested in 23andMe and the like, but until there are protections in place, NO WAY Im giving that info up freely (or ... paying for it I guess) and this is exactly why.

      Make sure nobody 2 generations back in your family does it or it wont matter.

    2. Re:interested by bobbutts · · Score: 1

      All they require is an email address, so just use a throwaway and mail it to them from a public mail box.

  11. This Mystery of Lawlessness is already working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.

    Mystery Red of the Great American Eclipse
    It has blood on it!
    ABCNews: Eclipse makes pendulum wander

    1. Re: This Mystery of Lawlessness is already working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Game. Set. Match.

  12. California BioBank Stores Baby DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal....

    If you or your child was born in California after 1983, your DNA is likely being stored by the government, may be available to law enforcement and may even be in the hands of outside researchers.

    Like many states, California collects bio-samples from every child born in the state. The material is then stored indefinitely in a state-run biobank, where it may be purchased for outside research.

  13. why would you send your saliva into the internet?? by js290 · · Score: 1
    --
    "Tempers are wearing thin. Let's just hope some robot doesn't kill everybody." --Bender
  14. Security measures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Letâ(TM)s just blame the Chinese companies for this for their government connections. Bonus point put an arrest warrant on the officers of these companies.

    Wait. Itâ(TM)s done already?

  15. Accurate at what expense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's totally innocent. Some underpaid lab-tech processes some sample as quickly as possible so they can go home on time.

    Now once that sample.. that has zero verification by a third party... enters a database scanned by federal authorities is analyzed they can draw their conclusions faster than the submitter (23-and-me, family tree, ancestry.com) the information/misinformation begins.

    Too many times.. too many to mention in the last 15 years... juries rely on submitted DNA data and not the facts, not the evidence or due process. They want to be dismissed from duty with a get-out-of-jail card provided by either the state or the federal government.

    There is no absolute for crime... until we have something a more infallible version of "Minority Report"

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-doubt/480747/

  16. Twins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't a bunch of these outfits just all fail to match up identical twins?

    WTF is the good of that database?

    1. Re:Twins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they failed to 100% match up the ethnic ancestry profiles of identical twins.

      Some of the outfits failed miserably.

      Others matched them up with one or two percentage points difference which isn't really a surprise to some people who have done anything related to statistics and probability, numerical analysis, and genetics.

      The methodologies and ethnicity databases used in reporting ethnic ancestry are limited.

  17. False Positives and False Negatives by tobiah · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I developed algorithms and code for a genetic testing company, mostly aimed at infectious diseases. But one day the FBI came calling to see if our system could be used for identifying people, seeing as it was 30-120minutes and fully automated. Spit on one side, get an answer on the other.

    Sure, so I was briefly sent to the new alphabet-outreach department to look at that. And their test was based on matching 5 phenotypes out of 6. Worked well when it was first developed on 100 volunteers. In our test database of bit less than 200k subject samples, we'd get 0-10 positive matches for anyone in the lab, usually more than one. We'd also get false negatives, where we'd put someone's dna in the database and a new test would miss it. This is due to things like sample error, corruption, and genetic drift. Turns out the body is constantly evolving, and over 20 years blood genes are unlikely to match hair samples. In that 20 year span a hair sample may not match the previous one, due to drift.

    I suggested they look at more than 6 phenotypes to improve accuracy, was told that's the standard and its not changing, and dropped from the team a few days later.

    --
    "The ability to delude yourself may be an important survival tool" - Jane Wagner -
    1. Re:False Positives and False Negatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a really huge issue sadly so many people don't adhere to - the fact genetic drift does indeed happen due to the laws of physics itself.
      There are very few animals that have evolved countermeasures to this, and they are usually the genetically immortal ones. (as far as we know, at least! They could well die at some point due to this mechanism failing over time)

      Premature ageing is a bad thing especially when it comes to the skin as it is under incredible environmental stresses all the time, as is the colon. Both of them are, topologically, external surfaces (the same surface) and evolved with high cell turnover to prevent things like cancer while still being useful.
      With modern environments and diets, both of these organs are being destroyed at rates our genes simply cannot keep up with. They've never experienced such immense pressures against them.
      A potential solution, even if it has evolved now, won't reach most of the species for over 10,000 years minimum. (lower now given the amount of global interaction the species has, and might even go as low as 5,000 in the future)
      Admittedly if we did find such a gene, or genes, we'll more than likely be capable of splicing it in to anybody within a 100 years tops. We've already made a GM baby, the floodgates are open, no amount of ethics bullshit will hold it back now.
      The extreme amounts of damage done to peoples bodies is skewing the ages of cell types all over the place, which itself causes many illnesses as well as cancers directly due to the malformed signalling from said damage.
      It's so bad that you can take 2 samples from different areas of the body and get a totally different match, simply due to sheer damage! It's ridiculous that people still think you can match such trivially small numbers accurately!
      The whole industry really needs to adapt. it is causing irreparable harm to it as a whole.

    2. Re:False Positives and False Negatives by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Family Tree DNA's algorithm does not use phenotype matching, it uses SNP matching. For a match to be considered positive, thousands of SNPs in a row must match. This type of matching is much more reliable than what you seem to have experienced.

      https://www.familytreedna.com/...

  18. Which part of this allows them do it? I don't see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For Legal or Regulatory Process: We may share your Personal Information if we believe it is reasonably necessary to:

    Enforce or apply the FamilyTreeDNA Terms and Conditions;

    https://www.familytreedna.com/legal/privacy-statement

    Comply with a valid legal process (e.g., subpoenas, warrants);

    Protect the security or integrity of the Services; or

    Protect the rights, safety, or property, of FamilyTreeDNA, our employees or users.

    If compelled to disclose your Personal Information to law enforcement, we will do our best, unless prohibited by law, to provide you with notice.

  19. Why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    The problem is that they're doing something with the data that wasn't part of the original deal. That means the company utterly cannot be trusted with any data pertaining to persons, whatsoever, ever.

    This sort of thing is why the medical confidentiality exists, and these guys are violating it wholesale. I really don't care that it's "for a good cause", that it's because this is the FBI, or whatever. Medical confidentiality ought to apply to all things DNA and these guys need to be sued into the ground.

  20. Non-existent privacy by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    The complete lack of data and privacy protection in the U.S. is astounding. People seemingly not caring about it is even more astounding. Yes, some people can say they care, but unless these voices can amount to a force to drive relevant laws to be established, it's all just smoke.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  21. You may be two people by dna_got_me · · Score: 1

    First I would like to point out that some people are chimeras. ie they have two different sets of dna https://www.thisisinsider.com/... Second isn't it possible to change your dna with cas9?

  22. Reeeally?!? by aquabat · · Score: 1

    I'm probably not the first person in the comments to say "No shit, Sherlock", but did anyone actually not think this was happenning from day one with these companies? I mean come on. You're sending your DNA off in the mail to some random corporation so they can analyse it. There's a huge incentive there for them to give access to that information to anyone and everyone with a checkbook or a billy club. The icing on the cake is that the DNA is actually paying them to do this. This is a human-race epic self own.

    --
    A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
  23. muh free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this private business is allowed to do whatever they want with their private property
    (((alisa rosenbaum))) told me and thus it must be so

  24. Re: Bin Laden DNA tested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You wouldn't want to deep six the body before DNA tests confirm you killed the right guy, now would you? Unless.... AE911Truth dot Org

  25. We need to stop dickin around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    JUST ARREST EVERYONE ALREADY! We have the highest incarceration rates, and the most laws in the world. Everything you do is a crime or can be tied to a crime sometime in the past or future.

    Just arrest every single person in the United States. It will fix the homeless problem. It will ensure everyone is living in a gun free zone. It will ensure everyone has healthcare and food on the table. It will also stimilate the economy. Jails are a boom industry. Stop fusing around with this DNA bullshit. Everyone is guilty, and everyone needs to go to jail.

  26. Contra tact by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    I don't think they can do this without your permission or a warrant. While it is true 3rd parties are under no 4th Amendment obligation, they cannot just be a crypto wrapper for government access.

    Let's check page 2711 of the company's contract with you...

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Contra tact by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Let's check page 2711 of the company's contract with you...

      Yep. You have certainly agreed to give that data to others in there somewhere, in bullshit legalese. I'm not giving up my genetic material for one of these tests until/unless actual laws are formed protecting my data from being shared with third parties without a warrant.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  27. Gattacca is real! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And about to become more real as AI is merged with genetic interviews.

  28. Is sharing w/FBI in the testing agreement? by TheDarkener · · Score: 2

    My question: Are customers aware that Family Tree is potentially sharing their DNA with the FBI? Is it in the agreement for testing?

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:Is sharing w/FBI in the testing agreement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DNA testing has helped so many. Descendants of the enslaved, adopted or abandoned children had a tool to learn more about their origins. Now, that's become corrupted.

  29. Access is not really free by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    The article says that access to the database is "free." That's not entirely true. The "free transfer" feature is more of a demo than a real product. To get the "full" results, you have to pay $19.

    https://www.familytreedna.com/...

  30. Two problems... by bradley13 · · Score: 1

    I'm all for solving crimes, but there are (at least) two problems here...

    First is privacy: Did anyone who sent their DNA to these companies agree to have it rooted through by law enforcement without a warrant? Privacy is a concept, but apparently not in the US. If privacy rights make life more difficult for law enforcement, that's a small price to pay for a free society.

    Second, DNA tests are not nearly as reliable as people think. The test itself just looks at a sampling of markers, and interpretation of the results is somewhat subjective. Far worse, and nearly impossible to eliminate, is the danger of contamination. This is both on the side of DNA tests (saliva swab, but maybe you've kissed your SO) and at the crime scene (those skin flakes at the crime scene come from...who, exactly?).

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  31. collecting dna is the main goal by sad_ · · Score: 1

    recently there was an article on /. that indicated that the results you get back are unreliable and mostly incorrect.
    now we learnt the fbi is involved in using the dna information for solving (cold) cases.
    looks to me that the real purpose is collecting dna information, and all the rest doesn't really matter.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  32. Letter from Family Tree DNA President by DredJohn · · Score: 1

    Dear Customers:

    I am writing to address the news that our Gene-by-Gene laboratory, which processes genetic tests for several commercial clients in addition to all of the FamilyTreeDNA tests, has processed a handful of DNA samples for cold cases from the F.B.I. In many cases, the news reports contained false or misleading information.

    Let me start with this categorical statement:

    LAW ENFORCEMENT DOES NOT HAVE OPEN ACCESS TO THE FTDNA DATABASE.

    They cannot search or “dig through” FTDNA profiles any more than an ordinary user can. As with all other genetic genealogy services, law enforcement must provide valid legal process, such as a subpoena or search warrant to receive any information beyond that which any other user can access.

    I have been an avid genealogist since I was twelve years old. FamilyTreeDNA is not just a business, it is my passion. I fully understand your privacy concerns on a personal level.

    Law enforcement has the ability to test DNA samples from crime scenes and upload the results into databases, like any other customer can, and it appears they have been doing it at other companies for the past year. The distinction is that, according to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, we expect the FBI and law enforcement agencies to let us know when they submit something to our database. We moved to something transparent, rather than having them work in a stealthy way. Other than that, nothing changed that affects the privacy of our customers.

    FamilyTreeDNA has always taken your privacy seriously and will continue to do so. We’ve remained steadfast, always, refusing to sell your data to pharmaceutical companies and other third parties.

    One of the key reasons law enforcement wanted to submit their samples to us is the same reason many of you have: out of all the major companies, FamilyTreeDNA is the only one that has its own lab, and our customers’ samples never leave our company.

    As previously stated, law enforcement can only receive information beyond that which is accessible to the standard user by providing FamilyTreeDNA with valid legal process, such as a subpoena or a search warrant. Again, this is specified in FamilyTreeDNA’s Terms of Service, just as with all other companies.

    ABOUT OUR TERMS OF SERVICE

    The Terms of Service were changed in May of 2018 to reflect GDPR requirements, and we informed our customers about the update at that time. Those changes included a paragraph that required law enforcement to receive our permission to enter the database and since it was a part of the overall update, notice was sent to every FTDNA customer. Without infringing upon our customers’ privacy, the language in the paragraph referring to law enforcement was updated in December, although nothing changed in the actual handling of such requests. It was an oversight that notice of the revision was not sent to you and that is our mistake. Therefore, we are reverting our TOS to our May 2018 version, and any future changes will be communicated to you in a timely manner.

    This is the May 2018, GDPR-compliant version, communicated to you at that time: “You agree to not use the Services for any law enforcement purposes, forensic examinations, criminal investigations, and/or similar purposes without the required legal documentation and written permission from FamilyTreeDNA.”

    WE WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF COMMUNICATING WITH YOU.

    I am genuinely sorry for not having handled our communications with you as we should have.

    We’ve received an incredible amount of support from those of you who believe this is an opportunity for honest, law-abiding citizens to help catch bad guys and bring closure to devastated families. We want you to understand, as many of you already do, that you have the same protections that you’ve always had and that you have nothing to fear.

    We’ve also hea