← Back to context

Comment by lazide

6 hours ago

The stated purpose for biometrics and photos with PreCheck and Global Entry is to identify you, so it’s not likely against its stated purpose to use it for identification, per-se.

Now using it to target protesters? Meh.

12 comments

lazide

Reply
BloodyIron  5 hours ago

Consider the information can be used for more than just identifying you... if you have sufficient quality biometrics they can be used to _impersonate_ you, including "fingering" you for things you didn't do. Police forces have "planted" evidence for decades now, biometrics can be just another thing that can be planted. The problem is, you can't fight it, because it's absolutely unique to you (with some extreme exceptions).

This is one of _many_ reasons why biometrics need to be a personal civil liberty. The individual must have the right to say "no" to _any_ "requirement" for giving up biometric data, unless they are convicted as a criminal (IMO). Because once you deliver that information, you _cannot_ trust any other party _to actually do what they say will do and destroy said data_, and that's not even considering just poor storage of said data.

Once your biometrics are in a database, you're fucked *for life* because it's completely unrealistic to have it destroyed with absolute certainty. This needs to be a *global human right*, as hard as those are to come by still.

  • lazide  5 hours ago

    I don’t disagree. What will (and is) actually happening is every government everywhere is rushing to get these systems setup ASAP.

    • NotSammyHagar  35 minutes ago

      But it's still awful. It doesn't matter at this moment that other governments may be doing this. We don't want that for us (and I don't want it for others either).

datsci_est_2015  5 hours ago

Identify you when though? Important question I guess

  • lazide  5 hours ago

    The US has been using ICE a lot.

    Guess who is doing the identifying - CBP and ICE. Guess who runs borders and immigration, which is the use case for PreCheck and Global Entry?

    Guess what the stated jurisdictional limits are for CBP? 100 miles from any possible border [https://legalclarity.org/immigration-map-of-us-jurisdictiona...].

    Guess who has essentially unlimited jurisdictional limits? ICE.

    So they can pretend they are ‘checking for immigration status’ using the existing photos and biometrics, while simultaneously gathering information on who is at what protest.

    Then the info gets shared once gathered - with or without plausible deniability - and blam. Bobs your uncle.

    • defrost  5 hours ago

      > Guess what the stated jurisdictional limits are for CBP? 100 miles from any possible border

      To quote a prominent US historian:

        In a constitutional regime, such as ours, the law applies everywhere and at all times. In a republic, such as ours, it applies to everyone. For that logic of law to be undone, the aspiring tyrant looks for openings, for cracks to pry open.

  One of these is the border. The country stops at the border. And so the law stops at the border. And so for the tyrant an obvious move is to extend the border so that is everywhere, to turn the whole country as a border area, where no rules apply.

  Stalin did this with border zones and deportations in the 1930s that preceded the Great Terror. Hitler did it with immigration raids in 1938 that targeted undocumented Jews and forced them across the border.

      * https://snyder.substack.com/p/lies-and-lawlessness

    • JumpCrisscross  5 hours ago

      > Guess who runs borders and immigration, which is the use case for PreCheck and Global Entry?

      Not ICE?

      > Guess who has essentially unlimited jurisdictional limits? ICE.

      ICE thinks that. The courts are disagreeing.

      5 replies →