---
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 16:11:20 +1100
From: Roger Clarke <Roger.Clarke@private>
Subject: Face-Recognition Technology - FOR DISTRIBUTION
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO ALL RELEVANT LISTS
AUSTRALIAN GOVT TRIES TO MAKE FACE-RECOGNITION LOOK GOOD
________________________________________________________________________
Applications of face-recognition technology have been uniformly
unsuccessful. Technology providers and security agencies are desperate for
some good news.
It's very likely that a project called SmartGate, conducted by the
Australian Customs Service, will be trumpeted throughout the world as the
good news that face-recognition technology has been waiting for.
This email contains an assessment of the extreme manipulation of data,
truth and the media on which such 'good news' stories will be based.
________________________________________________________________________
Background
SmartGate is the Australian Customs Service's pilot face-recognition
system, using German Cognitec technology. It has been trialled for a year
on QANTAS aircrew. The stated intention of the Australian Government is to
extend it further. This project is running in parallel with a Passports
Office project to change Australian passports to conform with U.S. demands.
Customs have been trying to convince suppliers to finance the development
of the scheme. It does not appear that any independent testing has been
performed; but a couple of international experts were invited to review
the internal test results. A media event was held on Friday 6 Feb 04. The
information made available to the public is listed below.
________________________________________________________________________
Analysis of the Available Information
The brazenness of Custom's manipulation of media and public opinion exceeds
the standards normally expected of the Government.
(1) No data has been provided, despite assurances given in the past that
data *would* be provided.
(2) The invited experts who were paraded by Customs are arguably about the
world's two foremost designers of testing for biometric technologies.
But is appears that:
(a) they did not *perform* the tests
(b) they did not *design* the tests
All that they were permitted to do was explained as follows:
- they "reported on three reports"
(only one of which was a technical test)
- they "conducted independent obervations" (i.e. watched it in operation)
- they "reviewed SmartGate data logs [and other, derivative documents]"
(which are meaningless without additional information, and analysis)
(3) The only report that matters was undertaken by the Defence Science and
Technology Organisation (DSTO). There are some serious problems here:
(a) no information whatsoever has been provided about that study, i.e. the
public is expected to accept at face-value the assertions made about the
methods used, the controls applied, and the outcomes;
(b) DSTO is not in any sense independent. It is a government agency. Its
assurances need to be regarded with the same degree of scepticism as any
other arm of a government that has demonstrated itself to regard national
security as paramount and what it releases to the public as a means to an end.
(4) The best quotation that Customs seem to have been able to extract from
the two experts was that "the scheme's performance is remarkably good for
an operational facial recognition system".
That seems quite positive, until you realise that the other attempts around
the world have been abject failures, and pilot after pilot has been quietly
abandoned.
In other words, the quotation can be readily interpreted as "it doesn't
work very well, but it's better than the other disasters we've seen".
This is borne out by an answer by one of the experts to a reporter's
question. He said: "In one test 100 company employees attempted to
impersonate someone other than themselves and eight of them were falsely
accepted by the system. That is a very low rate of false accepts". At
that"very low" level of false acceptances, every 747-load of people can
include 25-30 terrorists; and some (undeclared) number of people will miss
the plane because they were false rejections, and they're still waiting in
the queue for interrogation.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The Minister had promised that the announcements about the tests would
vindicate his claims that the scheme works.
This media event has done two things.
It has confirmed that the Government intends to continue constructively
misinforming the public about Smartgate and about biometrics technologies.
And it has, in the process, tarnished the reputations of the two scientists.
________________________________________________________________________
The Available Information
(I wasn't invited to the media event, and haven't been provided with any
information by Customs. That's fair enough: I'm not a member of the
media. But on the other hand I've been much-quoted in the media; and
Customs have previously sought meetings with me, and adopted the pretence
of wanting to keep me informed).
The media release is at:
http://www.customs.gov.au/site/index.cfm?area_id=5&content_id=14859
This points to two marketing brochures (1 x 1-page and 1 x 2-page) at:
http://www.customs.gov.au/resources/Files/media%20background%20smartgate.pdf
http://www.customs.gov.au/resources/Files/media%20background%20smartgate%20information.pdf
No further information was provided.
The unlinkable page reached via:
- 'protecting our borders' / 'border technologies' / 'SmartGate'
has had all previous documents withdrawn from it, and the only links
available are the two marketing brochures pointed to above.
None of the other 17 hits arising from a search on 'SmartGate' on Customs'
web-site appear to be new.
________________________________________________________________________
Additional background information is at:
http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/SmartGate.html
including:
- links to the Customs site
http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/SmartGate.html#SmartSrces
- links to media reports
http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/SmartGate.html#Media
Sceptical reports about face-recognition technology, including the
authoritative ACLU materials and EPIC's resource-page, are indexed at:
http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/BiomBibl.html#RSFR
________________________________________________________________________
--
Roger Clarke http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/
Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd, 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
mailto:Roger.Clarke@private http://www.xamax.com.au/
Visiting Professor in the eCommerce Program, University of Hong Kong
Visiting Professor in the Baker Cyberspace Law & Policy Centre, U.N.S.W
Visiting Fellow in Computer Science, Australian National University
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Feb 08 2004 - 22:13:55 PST