DHS Goes Biometric, Says Travelers Can Opt Out Of Face Scans By Not Traveling

from the driving:-dangerous-and-unpatriotic dept

The DHS has decided air travel is the unsafest thing of all. In the wake of multiple fear mongering presidential directives -- including a travel ban currently being contested in federal courts -- the DHS has introduced several measures meant to make flying safer, but in reality would only make flying more of a pain in the ass.

The government has argued in court that flying is a privilege, not a right, and the DHS seems hellbent on making fliers pay for every bit of that privilege. We've seen laptop bans introduced as a stick to push foreign airports to engage in more security theater and a threat to rifle through all travelers' books and papers to ensure nobody's reading explosive devices.

Now, the DHS is going to be scanning everyone's faces as they board/disembark international flights.

The Department of Homeland Security says it’s the only way to successfully expand a program that tracks nonimmigrant foreigners. They have been required by law since 2004 to submit to biometric identity scans — but to date have only had their fingerprints and photos collected prior to entry.

Now, DHS says it’s finally ready to implement face scans on departure — aimed mainly at better tracking visa overstays but also at tightening security.

The DHS swears it won't be retaining face scans of US persons, but apparently never considered limiting the collection to foreign travelers. Instead, the DHS will "collect them all" and supposedly toss out US citizens' scans later.

John Wagner, the Customs deputy executive assistant commissioner in charge of the program, confirmed in an interview that U.S. citizens departing on international flights will submit to face scans.

Wagner says the agency has no plans to retain the biometric data of U.S. citizens and will delete all scans of them within 14 days.

This sounds good (other than the collect-them-all approach) but Wagner's not done talking. The DHS is obviously hoping to make use of US persons' scans at some point.

However, [Wagner] doesn’t rule out CBP keeping them in the future after going “through the appropriate privacy reviews and approvals.”

This makes the promise of a 14-day deletion period dubious. The DHS would seemingly prefer to keep everything it collects, so this deletion promise may morph into data segregation, with the government keeping domestic scans in their own silo for possible use later.

The program is already being deployed at a handful of major airports. During the trial run, passengers will be able to opt out of the collection. But the DHS's own Privacy Impact Assessment [PDF] makes it clear it won't be optional for long.

Privacy Risk: There is a risk to individual participation because individuals may be denied boarding if they refuse to submit to biometric identity verification under the TVS.

Mitigation: This privacy risk is partially mitigated. Although the redress and access procedures above provide for an individual’s ability to correct his or her information, the only way for an individual to ensure he or she is not subject to collection of biometric information when traveling internationally is to refrain from traveling. [emphasis added] Individuals seeking to travel internationally are subject to the laws and rules enforced by CBP and are subject to inspection.

To opt-out is to not travel. Considering this affects international flights, the DHS has a very good chance of achieving 100% compliance.

But there are other percentages to be concerned about, like accuracy. The DHS has a 96% accuracy requirement for face scanning tech (but, oddly, not for its TSA employees...), but its Privacy Impact Awareness report doesn't actually say whether vendors have been able to hit that mark. In practical terms, what's being deployed could still be well under that percentage. Considering the number of things that need to go right to obtain a useful face scan, the error rate could be far above 4% once less-than-ideal capture conditions are factored in.

Whatever privacy assurances are being given now, expect them to be whittled down in the future, especially if the government continues to engage in reactionary, fear-based lawmaking. With the exception of some post-Snowden surveillance reforms, the government's desire to collect databases full of US persons' info has only steadily increased since September 11, 2001.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 2:15am

    Worked with names, why not faces?

    Because the no-fly list of names has been such a smashing success of course they want to roll out a facial scanning program as well.

    As I've said before, for those that live in other countries: unless you absolutely must physically come to the US for business purposes, and cannot achieve what you need to accomplish digitally, do not come to the US. Unless you like being treated as a suspected criminal spend your money and attention elsewhere, for your own safety and security.

    This makes the promise of a 14-day deletion period dubious. The DHS would seemingly prefer to keep everything it collects, so this deletion promise may morph into data segregation, with the government keeping domestic scans in their own silo for possible use later.

    'Dubious' is certainly one way to put it, though I'd lean more towards 'Not even remotely believable for so much as a second', as I suspect that the second sentence is likely to be the case, where they might delete a copy, but only after they make one or more copies to be stored elsewhere. Why go through all the hassle of creating new records when/if they can managed to twist the law into allowing them to keep data of US persons when they can just use the same data they originally gathered?

    Whatever privacy assurances are being given now, expect them to be whittled down in the future, especially if the government continues to engage in reactionary, fear-based lawmaking.

    Yeah, going to have to disagree here. The justification give may be based upon fear-mongering of the public, but I rather doubt that the actions being undertaken are at all 'reactionary' and/or 'fear-based' on the part of those engaged in them. They know what they're doing, the only question at this point is 'why?', with no good answers that I can see.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Yes, I know I'm commenting anonymously, 14 Jul 2017 @ 3:53am

    they are already deploying (dangerously) overpowered body-scanners.
    Any betting on how long it will take for the first (badly adjusted) face-scanning laser to blind someone?
    /snark

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 4:46am

    Is this really a big deal?

    I mean, they already check your ID and search you, it isn't like there is an expectation of privacy in an airport.

    I do miss the days of walking into an airport, buying a ticket, and walking to the plane and that was it, but I don't think those days are coming back.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:13am

      Rights are rarely destroyed in a single go

      And what exactly have we gained by the drastic increase in 'security'?

      Increased wait times.

      Intrusive searches of luggage and bodies that fail spectacularly to find dangerous items(valuable items on the other hand...)

      People treated terribly or even forbidden from flying at all simply because they happen to have the 'wrong' name.

      People detained for hours for no good reason.

      All of this for... what again? Yes, it is a 'big deal', because it's yet more ratcheting up of the spectacle that is 'Security Theater', where privacy and rights take yet another ding for no real benefit to the public, and it will be followed by another 'minor security update', and another 'new rules for boarding', and another 'change in scanning procedures'...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:35am

      Re: Is this really a big deal?

      Yes, this is a big deal. Scans like these are going to be used within the homeland, scanning faces like license plates. Your face scan will get a unique identifier and in 10 years we'll hear from another Snowden that this metadata had been collected for the decade prior.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:36am

      Re: Is this really a big deal?

      Welkome to Amerika Komrad!

      If you cannot be bothered to fight against the smallest threat to liberty, then it is doubtful that you will be or can be useful in the fight against the largest threats to liberty.

      All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for "good men" to do nothing.

      I put good men in quotes because... well you are NOT good if you are doing nothing, are you are either a coward or just your standard worthless human.

      Add to humanity instead, do not take away from it through inaction.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:37am

        Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

        you are either a coward or just your standard worthless human.

        Speak for yourself, dipshit.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        stderric (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 1:22pm

        Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

        "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists" didn't help then, and it doesn't help now. Absolutist polemics that turn to absolutist actions just fuck everything up and turn everyone, including your more rational ideological allies, against you.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 16 Jul 2017 @ 8:17am

        Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

        What are you doing about it?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:42am

      Re: Is this really a big deal?

      It will be a big deal when your face matches some wanted criminal.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 8:04am

        Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

        Dude, they already have a database of passport photos and driver license photos, what is the big deal?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:03am

          Re: Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

          They already have cams everywhere ... why are you complaining about the one in your bedroom?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:21am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

            The Chief of Police in Houston, Texas once proposed putting cameras in everyone's homes.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 12:34pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this really a big deal?

              The Chief of Police in Houston, Texas once proposed putting cameras in everyone's homes.

              Instead of proposing that, they should just wait for a few iterations of technology. By then people will be paying Amazon to put always-on cameras in their own homes.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PlagueSD (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:54am

      Re: Is this really a big deal?

      Yes. back in my Brig Chaser days for the Military, it was nice walking through an airport in full gear (radio, handcuffs, nightstick, badge), setting off the metal detector and just being waved through to go pick up a deserter.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 4:55am

    Workaround

    To opt-out is to not travel.

    Not quite. First of all, domestic travel is still travel. And it's not clear that the government could stop a citizen from leaving the country or require them to submit to this; so leaving via something other than an international flight could work. Exit the USA via boat, car, or walking (possibly after a domestic flight—until they extend this program), then catch a flight from another country.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:02am

      Re: Workaround

      Jesus wouldn't have a problem if he decided to go from the US to Europe. Considering He is THE man and tech has evolved he would just teleport.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:39am

        Re: Re: Workaround

        It is a little unfair to compare human problems with a being whom can command the very elements to obey.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Stephen, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:52am

      Re: Workaround

      Anonymous Coward: "...then catch a flight from another country."

      That only works if the other country isn't also doing face scans. My guess is that it is only a matter of time before the US strong-arms other nations into keeping their own biometric collections, especially amongst allies like Canada.

      There's an old saying. When the US catches cold, the rest of the world gets pneumonia. The US is going to make it its business to close off all loopholes--including the one you have just suggested.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 8:07am

      Re: Workaround

      Just travel by private aircraft. What's the problem? If you can't afford your own private aircraft that's your own fault.

      /s

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 10:17am

        Re: Re: Workaround

        Just travel by private aircraft. What's the problem? If you can't afford your own private aircraft that's your own fault.

        It's actually pretty affordable to travel by general aviation on a tiny plane. You don't have to own one, just find a pilot.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Richard (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:00am

    Name the enemy

    the government's desire to collect databases full of US persons' info has only steadily increased since September 11, 2001.

    When you refuse to honestly and accurately name the enemy - then the result is that everyone is ragarded an as enemy - and this is the nonsense that ensues.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Seegras (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:04am

      Re: Name the enemy

      Your Enemy? It's your own government. Since 2001 at least.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Richard (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:48am

        Re: Re: Name the enemy

        Way to misunderstand - and then come up with a platitude.

        When the government refused to name the enemy accurately in 2001 they effectively made everyone into an enemy - because when you don't know who the enemy is then you have to treat everyone as a potential enemy. So yes - the US government is now your enemy so you are sort of right - but I doubt that you understand the logic - or have a clue how to fix it.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:27am

          Re: Re: Re: Name the enemy

          We have met the enemy and it is us

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:25am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Name the enemy

            People here at TD do not subscribe to that.

            When a politician is corrupt and gets voted back into office it is NOT the peoples fault. They are innocent little lambs just doing their best with the candidates they were "given". You can't blame them for not knowing how the government operates, or the secret laws that can get them labeled a terrorist, and how much money the can and cant put into a bank account before the IRS seizes it without a trial or conviction.

            I mean, you would think a bunch of people that had the power to "elect" their representatives could give it out.

            As you have clearly stated...

            "We have met the enemy and it is us"

            But we all disagree with that here at TD! We are innocent and without blame!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:09am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Name the enemy

              Although your simplistic point of view is shared among many in the public, I find it lacking.

              Corruption is not limited to politicians and seldom do you find a non corrupt politician on the ballot. Dear citizen, please select one of the following corrupt mofos - thank you for your service. Victim blaming is fun and exciting for the entire family, see how many victims you can blame today.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:05am

      Re: Name the enemy

      But that's precisely who is the enemy. Anybody who disagrees with the system. And Americans seem to have an annoying feeling for that pesky freedom of speech.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:00am

    It would be interesting if people decided it isn't worth the hassle and actually stopped going to the US and spending their money there. Oh wait, it is already happening.

    Sadly I have relatives there so I might need to go every once in a while. I'm preparing the disposable phones.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:38am

      Re:

      Don't forget the disposable social media accounts. They're gonna want your Facebook and Twitter accounts, so have a fake scrubbed account especially set up for them.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Champion, 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:14am

    does anyone care anymore

    if you have to fly you deal with it

    me im never going to the usa anyhow so like i give a shit

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      stderric (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:19am

      Re: does anyone care anymore

      if you have to fly you deal with it

      me im never going to the usa anyhow so like i give a shit

      It's weird, because the attitude you have about the US is the same attitude that would make you what our government considers an 'ideal citizen'.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ben (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:34am

    Stupidity

    Does the DHS only employ stupid fantasists, or people with a psychopathic aversion to the success of the American tourist industry? [shakes head in international bemusement]

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      stderric (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:42am

      Re: Stupidity

      Does the DHS only employ stupid fantasists

      Let's just say that most of the people that go to work for the DHS probably have nicer tactical gear and armored vehicles at home than what the government issues 'em for using on the job.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 5:54am

    Such a great country...
    If I don't want to give up my rights as a consumer, I can opt to not have AT&T & skip the internet or calling people.

    If I don't want to have my bio-metrics stored by the same people who can't protect secret cyber tools, protect tax payer info, stop a terrorist plot they put into motion, I can just not fly.

    This is just dumping tons of cash into yet another badly thought out idea that made it up the ranks because if we don't someone might brand us as hating America.

    Perhaps its time we point out that their actions are showing more and more that that do hate America, its freedoms, & laws.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:12am

    Another reason why some folks don't want the government banning guns and were so paranoid under Obama. You see things like this, and yes, it does seem our country is moving in a direction that may warrant taking up arms.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Oblate (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:32am

    Now it all makes sense...

    > The DHS would seemingly prefer to keep everything it collects,...

    I think we may have completely misjudged their motives. Someone high up in DHS must own a data storage/backup company.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Stephen, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:34am

    Face Scans of "US persons" not kept?--Yeah Right!

    "The DHS swears it won't be retaining face scans of US persons...."

    It won't need to keep them--as long as the Five Eyes also institute face scanning of air travellers and retain those of "US persons". Which, naturally, they will then get to share around with the DHS.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    trx302, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:51am

    scans

    That ship sailed a *long* time ago.

    The comp.risks newsgroup followed the Feds rolling out their new facial recognition systems in assorted airports, bus stations, and Federal buildings back in the late 1980s.

    On top of that, your face is recorded by who-knows-how-many security cameras at the airport, not all operated by the same organizations. The DHS thug matches your photo ID to your face before he takes an image of the ID.

    There are *restaurants* that use facial recognition software. That waitress who remembered your special order from six months ago? That's not because you were such a memorable customer.

    "Welcome to the 21st century."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Stephen, 15 Jul 2017 @ 8:49am

      Re: scans

      trx302: "On top of that, your face is recorded by who-knows-how-many security cameras at the airport, not all operated by the same organizations. The DHS thug matches your photo ID to your face before he takes an image of the ID."

      That is actually not so far-fetched. China is currently implementing a rolling out facial recognition on massive scale. It reportedly has over 170 million street cameras and intends to have another 450 million by 2020. For a glimpse into where it is all going, check out:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq1SEqNT-7c

      How long before the DHS starts suggesting America needs the same sort of system to help catch terrorists and other baddies?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 6:55am

    follow the money

    what senator owns the company providing the face recognition tech?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:45am

      Re: follow the money

      The old saying is "Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity." The new saying is "Never attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to greed."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:11am

    It's like mugshots..

    .. for innocent people

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:12am

    Technical flaws and all

    So, how do they tell who are the foreigners and who are the Americans? You can't just go by "looks foreign" using Machine Learning since the US is such a melting pot (maybe Sweden could do it).

    What that means is they have to have a database of facial scans to compare the new scans against. Of course, you only have 300 million Americans versus ~7 billion other people on the planet so it is easier, simpler, more tractable to keep the smaller data set. This means the DHS must be keeping a database of all US citizens travelers' face scans to compare against. Best guess is they use the picture you submit for your Passport since you need one before you can do international flights.

    And I'm betting the "we throw away the scans of Americans" means they throw away the new ones after taking notes on who, what, where because they already have a good base scan.

    I know, tinfoil country, but as a software developer, this stands out as possibly the only solution that works at scale.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:23am

    Don't they already have a database of passport holders? Wouldn't a scan at the airport do one of two things, confirm you are who is on the passport? Additionally, match that scan against some other database?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:33am

      Re:

      How can you get citizens to agree to let you track them?
      Just say you are looking for foreign enemy's. One of the OLDEST tricks in the "how oppress your citizens, and them let you, ancient stone tablet guide"

      You citizens have a good day, I need to go and put on my sheep costume, I have a press conference in a few minutes.

      ~Politician.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Advocate (profile), 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:40am

    "this deletion promise may morph into data segregation" If you mean "this deletion promise is about as certain to be broken as the sun is to rise in the morning", then yes. Otherwise, no.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 7:51am

    It IS a right, not privilege.

    The government has argued in court that flying is a privilege, not a right

    They have also argued that the bill of rights don't apply for the majority of Americans because they live within 100 miles of a border. Neither one is true, and the US govt is violating rights on a massive scale. If the government can't or won't control itself (through its own courts, hah!), then the alternatives are much more violent.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Personanongrata, 14 Jul 2017 @ 8:12am

    How is the Water Frogs?

    Whatever privacy assurances are being given now, expect them to be whittled down in the future, especially if the government continues to engage in reactionary, fear-based lawmaking.

    Especially if the citizens of the once was republic continue to genuflect to US government diktats upon command.

    Convenience and expedience are no reason to subject yourself to US government tyranny and relinquish your natural rights.

    Cast off the repressive/criminal yoke of the US government.

    Demand to be treated as a human being and citizen not US government chattel.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    A Passing Stranger, 14 Jul 2017 @ 9:48am

    Knowing the general incompetence of the TSA, their scanning tech is probably a head-sized inkpad and a piece of paper to put the 'scan' on.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Cressman, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:03am

    Not as worried

    I'm really not as worried about this as some other things. I assume that if I'm leaving the country, they have my face for the passport anyway.

    If it's a domestic flight, I assume that my likeness is captured dozens, if not hundreds, of times through security cameras.

    As far as not keeping faces of US citizens... yah... right. You mean, sort of like, them not keeping the conversations of US citizens in surveillance of foreign citizens. Because that NEVER happens... oh wait.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 3:01pm

    is bolivian prez evo morales still on no fly list?

    how about that toddler nailed at newark airport for being a terrorist?

    don't we waste time for wrong approaches?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 3:59pm

    "Wagner says the agency has no plans to retain the biometric data of U.S. citizens and will delete all scans of them within 14 days."

    BULLSHIT!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Cpt Feathersword, 14 Jul 2017 @ 4:04pm

    DHS will delete your facial image...

    ... after they extract your biometrics for permanent storage. 14 days should be enough.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    BostonPilot (profile), 16 Jul 2017 @ 6:57am

    are there any regulations about the amount or style of makeup you can wear?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Coyne Tibbets (profile), 16 Jul 2017 @ 9:12am

    Seems like a problem

    Wagner says the agency has no plans to retain the biometric data of U.S. citizens and will delete all scans of them within 14 days.

    So Mr. Wagner answer me this: who's going to go through all those pictures and decide who is a US citizen and who isn't? In 14 days?

    Right. So it looks like you be keeping those bit longer, huh?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 16 Jul 2017 @ 11:18am

      Re: Seems like a problem

      "Well clearly we'll need to hire a good number of people to do this sorting, but would you look at that it looks like we don't have the budget for that at the moment, so if the government wants us to be able to delete information on american citizens they'll need to increase our budget.

      Again.

      Until that happens I guess it'll just continue to add up, and we'll get around to it eventually."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Coyne Tibbets (profile), 16 Jul 2017 @ 5:44pm

        Re: Re: Seems like a problem

        They could quadruple the budget and somehow there still wouldn't be enough money to pay people to do this. DHS just wants to keep everything forever, and any promise to the contrary is nonsense.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jonothan, 16 Jul 2017 @ 11:59am

    Where have we seen this before?

    Oh I know! 'Person of Interest' was a warning. Things that were in that show are happening now. O.o

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2017 @ 2:16pm

    Terrorists say their victims can opt out of terrorism by stopping breathing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Caution: Copyright
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.