Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Government Privacy

Delta Airlines Begins Using Facial Recognition Scanners To Replace Boarding Passes (cbslocal.com) 144

Posted by EditorDavid from the face-that-launched-a-thousands-flights dept.
"Delta Air Lines announced it will give passengers who fly out of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport the option to use facial recognition to board their flight instead of a standard boarding pass," reported a CBS affiliate this week.

The facial scanners will be installed this week at 16 gates, with availability on all international flights through Delta beginning in July. The airline is working with Customs and Border Protection on the process. The way it works is gate agents use facial scans for boarding passengers so that they don't need to manually compare their faces and their passport photos. They can skip to using the facial technology. Delta says the process saves about two seconds per passenger or about nine minutes for a plane with 270 people.
Delta says 72% of its customers have said they prefer facial recognition to standard boarding procedures. But James Lileks, a columnist for the Star Tribune, explains some of the ways this makes him uncomfortable: Here's the thing. You don't sign up for the facial recognition. You don't send them your face. They already have it. This part is just... glided over in the news reports, waved away like a minor detail you needn't worry your silly little head about.

The picture they probably have is my passport photo, taken in 2010... So I guess I'll have to stuff my cheeks with cotton before I lean into the machine that connects to a database of everyone's mug, and hope it doesn't go off
"I don't know what they do with people who grew a beard," Lileks adds, "but there's probably the option to shave on the spot."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Delta Airlines Begins Using Facial Recognition Scanners To Replace Boarding Passes More

Delta Airlines Begins Using Facial Recognition Scanners To Replace Boarding Passes

Comments Filter:

  • I'd do it. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Sunday June 23, 2019 @09:06PM (#58811396)

    Why not do this?

    There are already scores of cameras capturing your every move at airports, yes including boarding aircraft.

    You already have to present ID and have it visually examined to get to the planes.

    So what is the harm with letting them use a camera to identify you instead of having to present a boarding pass?

    There is absolutely no privacy issue here beyond what airports already do, only increased utility to passengers.

    You can even, if you squint, imagine a future where the well known traveller program is expanded so that basically you walk un-impeded from parking to airplane, while hidden systems verify who you are and that you require no further screening. That would be less intrusive than what they do today and frankly I'd rather have a computer system scanning me than a human.

    • > There is absolutely no privacy issue here beyond what airports already do, only increased utility to passengers.

      Yes, TSA goons already jack off to your nudes so might as well let Delta have your face.

      • Yes, TSA goons already jack off to your nudes

        It's the potential for things like that, why I want to get the humans out of the equation.

        Of course, with sufficiently advanced AI who can know if eventually computer systems will not become advanced enough to become aroused as well? Still better than humans though.

        • It's the potential for things like that, why I want to get the humans out of the equation.

          Getting humans out of the equation is quite literally impossible because it is humans and only humans that are interested in what the data tells them. The machines don't give a shit. Even if you have an automated system all that does is make it more efficient for some human to do something with the data and creates extra opportunities at some point for another human to violate your privacy or other civil rights. The entire point of collecting this data whether or not you use machines to make collection

    • Boarding time is determined by time it takes people to get in the plane, stow their bags, and sit down. Processing boarding passes is not a bottleneck, so nothing is gained by speed it up.

      For me, issue is not privacy but reliability.

      • If anything, boarding is probably improved by having people trickle through the boarding pass check, rather than having them all stampede the plane at once, blocking the aisles while they stow their bags, etc.

      • Boarding time is determined by time it takes people to get in the plane, stow their bags, and sit down. Processing boarding passes is not a bottleneck, so nothing is gained by speed it up.

        This is 100% correct. Speeding up the ticket checking is not and never has been the bottleneck. Speeding up a process that isn't the bottleneck will have precisely zero effect of boarding times. All it would do is make people wait on the ramp instead of by the gate agent. It won't get the plane off the ground any quicker or permit greater throughput unless they remove the critical path bottlenecks first.

        For me, issue is not privacy but reliability.

        No there is a very serious privacy issue here too. When I present a picture ID to a gate agent, only

        • When a database is used as described here, biometric data about me is stored in a database that I do not control

          But for the use case mentioned in the summary (passport photo verification) that is already true. Customs and Border Patrol is already using the same system, so the database already exists and is being used without your control. The headline about replacing the boarding pass appears totally made-up. If anything, this procedure for passport verification makes it less likely that someone will try to impersonate you by forging a physical passport with your name on it, since they will now be using the photo

        • No there is a very serious privacy issue here too. When I present a picture ID to a gate agent, only that gate agent has that data and I remain in control over who has access to it and when. When a database is used as described here, biometric data about me is stored in a database that I do not control and cannot see who has access to and that can be easily used in ways well beyond simply comparing my face to a picture.

          They already have the biometric data to compare to. (Different problem, but one that already exists.) Scanning to match at the gate isn't necessarily adding more data to that database. (Unless they are saving that, in which case they can track changes in your appearance over time, just like Google Photos can match my children's photos from infant to present.)

          If they already have your biometrics, and if they're not storing a new photo, the only new data they're capturing is that you were at a certain gate at

          • If they already have your biometrics, and if they're not storing a new photo

            You didn't think that argument through. Automated systems require using a camera. Camera's take pictures. When they are using a camera to look at me and compare to existing biometrics then by definition they are storing (or have the opportunity to store) a new photo of me. The gate agent cannot do that. Any camera based facial recognition system HAS to take a picture of me to compare to any existing picture. You might be ok with it but I'm not interested in enhancing their database without some benefi

            • You didn't think that argument through.

              Did you miss the next sentence?

              Unless they are saving that, in which case they can track changes in your appearance over time ...

              Sounds like I thought it through, and concluded that they probably aren't getting anything they don't already have.

              This is a common mistake people make, thinking that their opponents must not have the same information, or they don't understand. Sometimes - maybe most of the time? - the other side has all the same information but disagrees with your conclusion anyway. As long as you keep telling yourself it's an information problem you have no hope of persuading the other side

        • This is 100% correct. Speeding up the ticket checking is not and never has been the bottleneck.

          That is 100% wrong. It is quite common for there to be long periods of time when nobody is getting on the plane because the gate check is held up. Been there, see it with my own eyes.

          All it would do is make people wait on the ramp instead of by the gate agent.

          Nobody waits on the ramp. The people you see waiting on the ramp are employees who are waiting for the people to finish getting on so they can guide the plane out, or they're waiting for bags to show up to be loaded.

          It won't get the plane off the ground any quicker or permit greater throughput unless they remove the critical path bottlenecks first.

          One of which is having to look at every passenger's passport and compare the picture manually.

          No there is a very serious privacy issue here too.

          Another 100% wrong

      • Sorry but no. Boarding time is the fastest process of taking a plane. Consuming maybe 10-15 minutes of the 3 hour airport experience.

        • Boarding time is the fastest process of taking a plane. Consuming maybe 10-15 minutes of the 3 hour airport experience.

          It does not take three hours to turn an airplane around. They can do it in 20 minutes, IF they push the boarding process. If they don't push the boarding process, then they can't, and it becomes painfully clear that the boarding process is actually the bottleneck.

          I don't know where you get this three hour figure from, but you're making it up. Oh, I know, you're looking at the time it takes YOU to get to the airport and all the way through to departure and think it is somehow relevant to the time it actual

      • Processing boarding passes is not a bottleneck

        Doesn't matter, The value is for the passenger - it's more convenient, in that with all of the luggage you are juggling you no longer have to take out your phone and try to align it to a scanner and there's no danger of dropping it on the way into the plane.

        It would also matter for speed though for the first few travelers onto the plane - who are the exact kinds of regulars the Delta plan is targeting to help. So it seems to make a lot of sense both ways.

        • Oh for heavens sakes, you really can't print out the fucking boarding pass if you're a person who plans on carrying so much shit that you can't also hold your phone to scan the electronic version?

          My goodness, these are actually serious issues about privacy and governance, and your analysis is on the level of a 7-11 checkout line.

          And anyways, don't airline regulars already have memberships to a "VIP lounge" and board first?

          Your whole opinion seems based on trying to relieve very-minor inconveniences that are

          • Oh for heavens sakes, you really can't print out the fucking boarding pass

            You don't have to print out the boarding pass. They'll do that for you. You DO have to have a free hand to deal with it, which a lot of people don't seem to have anymore.

            My goodness, these are actually serious issues about privacy and governance,

            Privacy concerns for data they already have, and what "governance" issue do you think exist? Some matter of jurisdiction? Huh?

            And anyways, don't airline regulars already have memberships to a "VIP lounge" and board first?

            When they board in the process doesn't change the fact that this speeds things up and makes it more convenient. For everyone.

            The lounge access is completely irrelevant, of course.

            Your whole opinion seems based on trying to relieve very-minor inconveniences that are caused by being too cheap to just check another bag,

            Do you really have any idea what

            • If you don't have two fingers free to grasp the boarding pass, why would you expect to have a whole hand free to hole a phone?

    • The problem is not that they are doing it, it's where they got the data to do it.

      • The problem is not that they are doing it, it's where they got the data to do it.

        From the passport database, which they already have access to.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The privacy issue is that one more insecure system now has your biometric data.

      Hopefully there is a manual override too, for when the facial recognition fails. Could get really, really boring having to ask for a manual check every single time if the computer decides it doesn't like your face. And what are the chances that the $5 webcam they use for this thing struggles with dark skin?

    • Why not do this?

      There are already scores of cameras capturing your every move at airports, yes including boarding aircraft.

      You already have to present ID and have it visually examined to get to the planes.

      So what is the harm with letting them use a camera to identify you instead of having to present a boarding pass?

      There is absolutely no privacy issue here beyond what airports already do, only increased utility to passengers.

      You can even, if you squint, imagine a future where the well known traveller program is expanded so that basically you walk un-impeded from parking to airplane, while hidden systems verify who you are and that you require no further screening. That would be less intrusive than what they do today and frankly I'd rather have a computer system scanning me than a human.

      Do you actually believe that shit or is this sarcasm? It's hard to tell.

    • Why not do this?

      Basically because I don't want to add to the pile of data they already have about me for something that provides at best minimal utility to me. It benefits the airline but any benefits to me are at best minimal to nonexistent.

      There are already scores of cameras capturing your every move at airports, yes including boarding aircraft.

      This is true but at least currently they aren't uniquely identifying me under most circumstances. Uniquely identifying a person and their exact whereabouts in real time presents some VERY different privacy issues than merely having footage recorded somewhere.

      You already have to present ID and have it visually examined to get to the planes.

      That's correct but there

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      So what is the harm with letting them use a camera to identify you instead of having to present a boarding pass?

      False positives. Right now, it is so rare that someone gets on the wrong flight that it's international news. So it's a bad solution looking for a problem.

      You can even, if you squint, imagine a future where the well known traveller program is expanded so that basically you walk un-impeded from parking to airplane, while hidden systems verify who you are and that you require no further screening. That would be less intrusive than what they do today and frankly I'd rather have a computer system scanning me than a human.

      When I have fantasies, they usually involve more Mila Kunis.

      I'm putting that down under "never going to happen". The same as the fantasy where autonomous cars will automagically mean going eleventy bajillion leptons per mircofortnight, bumper to bumper and never having a collision.

      The being inspected by a person is as much psychological as it is ac

  • You need a passport to fly now?

    Sure, you can opt out of the "convenience", but not the tech. Like it or not, they are using it behind your back.

    • Given that its being offered on international flights, generally yes you do need a passport to fly on one of those routes - you might not need a passport domestically, but you need one for the majority of destinations from the US (Canada is perhaps one of the only exceptions, in that a passport card or a NEXUS card will suffice instead of an actual passport, but both of those will have photos attached to them anyway).

      I know the common derogatory meme is that Americans don't know what goes on outside their c

    • You need a passport to fly now?

      Yes, because even if you're only flying from Austin to Miami . . . you're flying in Russia now.

    • I only use my passport to travel inside the United States (when flying).

      My only concern is the security scan where you can't have anything on you (you can carry your boarding pass). I worry about my wallet and passport, which I cannot see when in the scanner machine.

      I've considered going back to full manual search. It's a pain in the ass, but it is thus for all parties.

      And bring a large thing of baby powder, it will waste 10-15 minutes of someone's time as they have to verify it's not drugs.

  • Life before cell phones (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 23, 2019 @09:18PM (#58811426)

    Do you remember life before cell phones?
    The idea of traveling cross country nowadays almost seems scary if you don't have a phone on you. What if something happens to you?

    I feel a similar thing will happen for facial recognition. In the future, people will be shocked to think in the past anyone could walk around in public anonymously, and it will be considered scary.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Viol8 ( 599362 )

      " and it will be considered scary."

      No, it really wont, except maybe by the current generation of bed wetting snowflake millenials. Hopefully following generations will kick back against it though.

    • I don't worry about what happens to me. I worry about what happens to my map.

    • Naw, my phone rarely even gets a signal if I'm out of town. That has always been true.

      If you're in a high population area where there would be continuous cell phone coverage, and you're in an emergency, it is most likely somebody else that is calling for help on your behalf.

  • The accuracy is insanely disproportionate (Score:5, Informative)

    by davecb ( 6526 ) <davecb@spamcop.net> on Sunday June 23, 2019 @09:22PM (#58811440) Homepage Journal

    if you one person to recognize, cool (> 80% success) If you have a trainfull, less good, because you have 80% times a trainfull. Now try a station full of train-fulls.

    Can you say "false negative"? Person with ticket denied boarding?

    --dave
    This is a variant on the birthday paradox, in which 20-odd persons gives you a 50-50 chance of getting an unexpected/undesired result. It's double-plus-ungood (;-))

    • if you one person to recognize, cool (> 80% success)

      Except modern facial recognition is way, way better than that.

      Can you say "false negative"? Person with ticket denied boarding?

      Can you say, "Just show them the boarding pass on your phone if the face scan doesn't work"?? Why would you assume you'd be denied boarding? That doesn't happen if a boarding pass today doesn't scan, they just give you a paper one.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by davecb ( 6526 )

        The number of comparisons increases as a factor of O(N*(N-1)) where N is the number of comparisons, while the accuracy creeps up by a few percent a year.

        The German Federal Security services engaged my employer for a scanning system, looked at the rate of improvement vs the rate of traffic growth and said "fooey" (;-))

        --dave
        they said some other stuff too, less polite

    • The biometric data is in the passport; the scanner just assigns a probability that your face matches your passport which matches the flight manifest. The probability doesn’t need to be especially high— 80% confidence should be fine.

      We are still a long way from a random person being able to be identified with a probability over ~99%, but when you combine sources of information it becomes a much easier problem to solve.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by davecb ( 6526 )

        That is a good approach, and all you really need do is scan the passport picture and compare it to the human, no biometric collection required!

        Hmmn, the U.S. scanned my passport picture and printed it on my customs slip in Boston this year, I wonder if kit's already in use?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      The person would have their photo ID and boarding pass information with them.
      Why? They have the ticket in their name and its all ok.
      Look up on a computer and its all good.
      A few people out of 100 have to show they paid the traditional way. A few questions and a computer search.
      The rest of the people get to move in a quicker way. Say 80 out of 100 are winners.
      Its not a "a station full of train-fulls" amount for each flight. Its a flight with a set number of people who would have once taken more tim

    • False negative is a non issue. We're not discussing staff free boarding.

      False positive is more of a problem.

    • This is not replacing all boarding tickets. If it fails they will verify you and print out a paper boarding pass at the gate. The same way if your phone doesn't scan your boarding pass now.

  • My evil twin (Score:4, Funny)

    by Archfeld ( 6757 ) <treboreel@live.com> on Sunday June 23, 2019 @11:15PM (#58811724) Journal

    My evil twin is going to steal my ticket and take my vacation. Come to think of it, what if I am the evil twin ?

  • Accuracy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rew ( 6140 ) <r.e.wolff@BitWizard.nl> on Monday June 24, 2019 @01:02AM (#58812032) Homepage

    From a technical viewpoint there are a few challenges.

    If there is a second identification, e.g. a boarding pass, then the facial recognition is probably quite accurate. Hi Mr Johnson, Yup, that's you, welcome aboard!

    If there isn't you have a couple of hundred people in your database, and expect very little "outsiders" to try to come in. Hi Mr Johnson, you're on the list for this flight, welcome aboard! Or: No, you're not on this flight.

    The last level is most difficult: Hi Mr Peterson. You're now at gate 18, your flight leaves from gate 19, please proceed to gate 19. Now it matched the face with someone NOT on the list for this flight.

    The thing is, that if your algorithm is 99% accurate, and you have a 100k people in the database, chances are you get one mis-identification each flight or so. So the algorithm says: hi miss Jolie, you're not flying with us today.

    To counter the last problems you can reduce the level a bit and work with just the list of people on the flight. Then when you get a 99% Jolie, 98% Upton match and Upton is on the flight, you might decide to say: Welcome aboard miss Upton.

    Anyway, with current technology and failure rates, still quite hard to do right.

    • You also have a backup human (the flight attendant who used to be checking boarding passes) who can look at the matched photo and compare it with the human in front of them.
    • It appears the headline is completely made-up. The summary just mentions passport photo verification. The last time I came back to the US from overseas, passport photo verification was done by a machine.

  • Techno-paradise. But when China does it? 1984! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    It's funny how these things are spun.

  • Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! No!
    The photo is probably from last week and is updated about weekly.
    And there's not a damned thing he can do about it.

  • Professional grade facial recognition of the type they use at airports and sporting events essentially ignores beards. The algos are highly optimized for changes in forehead, brow, and ears, which change less as you age and don't get covered with facial hair.

  • The boarding scene from this movie or it's sequel comes to mind, if anybody still remembers there were such movies.

  • Delta says the process saves about two seconds per passenger or about nine minutes for a plane with 270 people.

    So what? After the first 10 pax, the rest are standing around in the jet bridge after scanning their boarding pass, waiting on some moron to try to stuff their carry on in the bin the wrong way around. It's not going to have any real time savings at all.

  • "I don't know what they do with people who grew a beard," Lileks adds, "but there's probably the option to shave on the spot."

    I'm clean-shaven in my UK biometric passport photo. I have a (short) beard now. When I present my face to the facial recognition scanners at airport immigration (of late, Heathrow and Munich) the gate recognizes me and opens - So in that context, facial hair doesn't seem to matter.

  • ...are frequently stopped by unnecessary TSA screenings? For at least 20 years my father-in-law has been regularly pulled aside for extra questions and searches (sometimes even body cavity), because, as he was told by the TSA, a terrorist with the same name as his is on their watch list. He has an incredibly common first and last name, so probably some other characteristic(s) also flags him for searches, but what if facial recognition could end or reduce this hassle? I'm sure he would welcome it and the TSA

  • Wonder how many positives they'd get wearing a venerable Nixon mask, or a Gorilla mask.
    Gorilla mask, person is black... Hilarity ensues.

  • It's about 6 years, maybe 7, since we started having facial recognition systems imposed at several points between check-in and boarding, in any airport where flights departed to the USA. Because people all over the world want to murder Americans for the things their government do, and we non-Americans lose some of our privacy to make them feel safer.

    How about having a less murderous government - ever thought of trying that?

Slashdot Top Deals

The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.

Close