FBI's New Eye Scan Database Raising Eyebrows

mattnyc99 writes "The FBI has confirmed to Popular Mechanics that it's not only adding palm prints to its criminal records, but preparing to balloon its repository of photos, which an agency official says 'could be the basis for our facial recognition.' It's all part of a new biometric software system that could store millions of iris scans within 10 years and has privacy advocates crying foul. Quoting: 'The FBI's Next Generation Identification (NGI) system, which could cost as much as $1 billion over its 10-year life cycle, will create an unprecedented database of biometric markers, such as facial images and iris scans. For criminal investigators, NGI could be as useful as DNA some day — a distinctive scar or a lopsided jaw line could mean the difference between a cold case and closed one. And for privacy watchdogs, it's a dual threat — seen as a step toward a police state, and a gold mine of personal data waiting to be plundered by cybercriminals.'"

Blah

The DMV and the US government already have my picture (passport). Why should I give a shit if the FBI has it or has access to it?

Re:Blah

BBC did a documentary on biometrics a year or so back. Iris ID has been used in Dubai for soem time it said. Also it pointed out that a way to defeat this is any drug that dialates the pupils. So; smoke a bong and smile ;)

too many movies

I think someone's been watching too many movies. Aren't modern day iris scanners bad for your eyes. Sending crazy bright light directly into a person's eye will obviously damage it if it's done enough times. So all that logging in every day at the government's secret lab stuff is pure science fiction. I think personally doing an iris scan once can destroy enough rods or whatever to make people complain. They shouldn't be using this system and expecting people to be scanned whenever they want them to be.

Re:too many movies

You seem to be talking about retinal scanners -- iris recognition is considerably less intrusive. I don't know about retinal scans being harmful, but I'm quite sure iris recognition isn't.

(At least, in the superficial physical sense).

Re:too many movies

You're correct. Iris scans, as opposed to retinal scans, can be done quickly using only ambient lighting. And, with decent optics, they can be done at surprising distances. The only real limitation is the atmospheric effects you get from small air currents, thermals, etc. And, on a calm, cool day, those don't become an issue for a good way off.

Eyeglasses an advantage!

looks like all us "four-eyes" are going to have an extra modicum of privacy.

Re:too many movies

my eyes are still fine.

Hey! I'm over here!

Re:too many movies

Or going outside when the sun is shining.

What is this "sun" of which you speak?

Re:too many movies

You go outside!?

'Duel' threat?

> And for privacy watchdogs, it's a duel threat

I guess they really threw down the gauntlet, huh?

Now which weapon should I choose... rapier and/or dagger?

Re:'Duel' threat?

I think I'll take banjos, for $500.

En Garde

And for privacy watchdogs, it's a duel threat

En garde!

well of course it's raising eyebrows...

how else would the scanner be able to read the eye?

test subjects

They should use the politicians that control the agency, and the upper level bosses in the agency, as the first test subjects. Not that they have anything to hide, but I'm guessing they wouldn't like it in this case.

I see where this is going...

Well, what about the people with no eyeballs? OR HANDS?! OR FACES!? OR EVEN DNA?! You think criminals are dangerous, it's the criminal zombies you have to be really afraid of! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

They never would have caught me...

if I hadn't left an image of my retina at the crime scene!

Hold up

Why do they need our Eye Scan Data? I do not leave my iris information at a crime scene. I do however leave my DNA and fingerprints. So what happens when the FBI DB gets hacked and some serial killer changes his Eye Scan with mine. The FBI has no way of knowing who is who. I know some of you may say that the FBI will also have pictures of me and witnesses etc. but it use to be that DNA was not trusted very much and now a person can be put away on DNA evidence alone, so it is all too soon till a person can be put a way or arrested just because their eye scan says they are someone they are not.

Re:Hold up

Nevermind someone hacking the FBI DB - what if some data entry monkey just screws up their data entry?

"And now, entering data for serial killer John Doe, III" while having the record open for Jon Do, II. How will this be changed? Updated?

I have a trivial mistake in my passport file (they have the wrong passport labeled as lost), and it is costing me 2 hours at immigration every time I fly. I have checked, and it is not possible to correct it. I fear to think what would happen with a more serious mistake. I'm pretty sure there'd be a lengthy trial involved, if not outright conviction and lengthy appeal.

Re:Hold up

I do not leave my iris information at a crime scene.

Er... what *do* you leave at your crime scenes?

And?

Technology has been moving this way for decades. There is even an argument that it's been moving this way for centuries.

And so what? How much is this really going to effect us? Really? As things stand we have all our information stored by banks, hospitals, employers, and social networks. This is a natural progression.
Anyone who thinks governments wouldn't do this obviously didn't pay attention at school. They've been doing this since they came into existence.

This isn't going to result in a police state. Whats going on in Zimbabwe leads to a police state, not what we have here. All this is is a centralisation of information.

As for me, I don't care whether they want this info or not. And as for the cybercriminal thing, you believe your bank/hospital/employer is any safer? Seriously?

If this move would damn us, we've already been damned for some time.

Next up, world doesn't end when this happens.

Re:And?

Actually it's the other way round. A police state leads to centralised databases on guilty and innocent alike, not vice versa. Ask my sister-in-law (who grew up in the then DDR) or girlfriend (Brezhnev's USSR and Tito (and then Milosevic's) Yugoslavia.)

Hmmmm.

Alternatives

OK /.ers, if you're opposed to this, let's hear the alternatives. Describe a system that allows quickly tracking down criminals but protects personal privacy.

Please do Not

Look Into the Laser With Your REMAINING Eye.

The BIG problems with biometrics that rely on external facial features along with such things as facial bone structures is that they CAN be foxed rather easily by a good makeup artist as well as by plastic surgery.

Scars can be added - and removed - both by clever applications of makeup and/or plastic surgery. The set of a person's eyebrow ridge can similarly e altered (for the purpose of fooling scans) using either technology as well. So can the set of one's cheekbones, jawline or even the confirmation of the ears (another unique body feature, like the fingerprint).

Once again, the government goes down a path that is easily mucked up and that will produce highly questionable results.

Thanks again, Washington, for spending more of our money on eye scanners and less on things like flood control programs, bridge inspection teams and systems to keep our ports safe from maniacs who just might try to blow one of them higher than up!

Re:ok, so what's next?

You know how we have Godwin's law about Nazi Germany? Does anyone know if there is one about Orwell? I mean, it's fitting, but we'd be hitting it a lot lately.

Re:Yes, where is this technology outsourced from?.

Anybody notice the mention of Lockheed Martin in the original article?

Really? Is more outsourcing of sensitive government tasks the way to go? Have we learned nothing from experience...

The federal government outsources just about all of their sensitive science and engineering. Sandia National Lab [sandia.gov] is run by Lockheed Martin. LANL [lanl.gov] and LLNL [llnl.gov] are also run by contractors. Nothing new.