Have Your Fingerprints Read From 6 Meters Away 122
First time accepted submitter Burdell writes "A new startup has technology to read fingerprints from up to 6 meters away. IDair currently sells to the military, but they are beta testing it with a chain of 24-hour fitness centers that want to restrict sharing of access cards. IDair also wants to sell this to retail stores and credit card companies as a replacement for physical cards. Lee Tien from the EFF notes that the security of such fingerprint databases is a privacy concern."
Since the last time this technology was mentioned more than a year ago, it seems that the claimed range for reading has tripled, and the fingerprint reader business has been spun off from the company at which development started.
Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
If a gym, retail store, or credit card company ask for my finger prints, they will get told in no uncertain terms to politely go fsck themselves.
Not happening.
If you aint law enforcement, don't even bother asking.
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you aint law enforcement, don't even bother asking.
s/law enforcment/law enforcement with a valid warrant/
Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we've just eliminated fingerprints as a viable identification method.
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do they need to ask if they can read it from a distance?
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't need a warrant. They just need to arrest you. If you don't think they have a valid reason to arrest you and don't comply then resisting arrest becomes their reason.
You can sue them later, but good luck with that and with getting those prints out of the system.
Something you have, something you know, (Score:4, Insightful)
Something you are. This is just one of three.
It's funny they talk about not being connected to major crime databases - your employer would have a local copy that would be used for building access. Sure right up until they passed it off as part of your background check they'll run on everyone now. All part of your 90 day probationary period!
Re:not a good thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Pandora's box of technology is already open. Our only option now is to try to shape the future, not return to the past. Don't close it with hope still inside.
Re:not a good thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Take for instance, employees of a collections agency. These are people who perform a distasteful, but still required service. Nobody really likes being called by a bill collector, nor do they like having to use one to get deadbeat clients to pay up. Deadbeats especially, despise bill collectors, and some are even belligerent enough to be a real physical threat to collection employees. This is why many collections agencies provide work aliases for call center staff, etc. If a foolproof means of identifying people is developed, these employees are at risk.
If you fear being associated with your employer, perhaps you should work someplace else? Also, you seem like a very judgmental person - I mean "deadbeats"? Have you conseidered the current economic environment and the fact that a LOT of people have lost their jobs?
Fingerprints != valid method of identificaton (Score:5, Insightful)
There are several problems with this technology most importantly how it will be used.
#1.) Cops will use it like minority report. WOOO we know where you are
#2.) This leads to number 2. Computers are not really used to perform fingerprint analysis. Yes, they can shorten the list but, in the end, its always a human who decides if its a "match"
#3.) There is no standard protocol for deciding if two fingerprints match. It is completely subjective. The IAI has flat out said they won't create a protocol because its not possible
#4.) There is no predictable margin of error. Frankly with no protocol and 100% subjective human interpretation, there is no way to quantify the probability of a match or more importantly, the margin of error.....heck, fingerprint analysts have been shown to make different identification to the same prints on different days and in different context.
#4) fingerprint analysis operates on the assumption that all fingerprints are unique (or unique within a reasonable margin of error). There has never been any evidence to support this assumption. Even the FBI with probably the worlds largest fingerprint database has never published any data suggesting finger prints are unique.
This all leads to the worst part. Law Enforcement will put this in an automated system to read our prints around town and assume its good enough to harass, arrest and convict citizens.
I don't like where this is going.
Dont get me wrong, its cool tech. Its just going to make a mess of things
Re:Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
For many types of identity theft, often our only defense is that we're not worth impersonating.
Re:I always wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
what would SCOTUS say if someone would invoke their right to defend themselves and 2nd amendment against illegal arrest?".
It would never get to SCOTUS. The police would shoot you dead on the spot.
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because never in all of history has someone in America been arrested without good reason. And certainly no one has ever been charged with "resisting arrest" and nothing else.
For example:
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_13686438 [mercurynews.com]
http://articles.philly.com/2010-06-29/news/24962922_1_wawa-officers-civilians [philly.com]
And your word of caution. No it doesn't matter if you are right. If I shoot a cop who was trying to arrest me without valid cause, the fact that he didn't have a valid cause isn't going to stop the "large body of law enforcement officers out to cease my free movement". Just look at the cases of the non-knock warrant being served on the wrong house and the people inside doing what you say and getting shot because they dared defend themselves.
For example:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18328267/ [msn.com]
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95475 [go.com]