ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 31st October 2019, 09:44 AM   #41
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,632
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Your face must be matched to previously-verified documents. To hack this system you would first have to hack the document verification system. Once you've got that you're golden, but it's a little bit more complicated than just holding a picture up to the screen.
Surely any drivers licences or passport is already considered "verified" when you get it? The person whose face is on these documents is the person with the name, date of birth and so forth that are also listed on it.

This is what they said:

Quote:
In addition, Home Affairs is developing a Face Verification Service which matches a person’s photo against images used on one of their evidence of identity documents to help verify their identity. The Face Verification Service complements the Document Verification Service by preventing the use of stolen as well as fake identity information. This could assist in age verification, for example by preventing a minor from using their parent’s driver licence to circumvent age verification controls.
Now, how exactly would this system prevent Person A from using an image of Person B if they were prompted to submit to a facial-scan. We can already presume that they are able to get Person B's driver license (or other identity documents), since the inclusion of facial recognition was supposed to prevent that from being sufficient to "circumvent age verification controls". That was the whole point.

Seriously, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If they can get their drivers license or passport, then it's almost certain they can get a picture of their face. The only feasible way to prevent that from being effective would be for people to be required to go and use the kind of photographic machines they use when they photograph you for your drivers license or passport, usually at police stations or similar facilities. I don't have to point out that this would be incredibly cumbersome and disproportional to the alleged dangers they were supposed to protect minors from.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 31st October 2019 at 09:51 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st November 2019, 11:44 PM   #42
novaphile
Quester of Doglets
Moderator
 
novaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I don't expect that this will go anywhere. It's pointless, discriminative and technically unfeasible. I'm reacting to the people saying to just hold up a photo. That won't work.
Unless it's a photo of a person who has a driver's licence.

i.e. their parent.

Nevermind, Arcade22 has already made this point.
__________________
We would be better, and braver, to engage in enquiry, rather than indulge in the idle fancy, that we already know -- Plato.

Last edited by novaphile; 1st November 2019 at 11:45 PM. Reason: Ninja'd
novaphile is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2019, 10:48 PM   #43
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 64,342
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Surely any drivers licences or passport is already considered "verified" when you get it? The person whose face is on these documents is the person with the name, date of birth and so forth that are also listed on it.
A driver's license is not a primary form of identification. It's a secondary one. In order to get your driver's license, you need to provide primary ID documents - essentially, birth certificate and/or passport. Those are the verified documents.

Anyway, I don't pretend to be an expert either in cybersecurity or in Home Affairs' identity verification systems. Like I said before, I'm just saying that according to the submission itself which specifically calls this out, you won't be able to fool this system by holding up someone else's driver's license.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th November 2019, 06:04 AM   #44
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,930
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Tracking. That's how. The old ID check system was never capable of tracking you, and if it was anything like ID requirements for alcohol, only used if it wasn't obvious you were old enough. Any internet ID method is almost guaranteed to include tracking.
So what?
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th November 2019, 06:14 AM   #45
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 52,156
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
So what?
It's creepy to track people's data, particularly in the area of erotic interests. The information could be misused.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 02:29 AM   #46
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,930
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
It's creepy to track people's data, particularly in the area of erotic interests. The information could be misused.
Not like all the other tracking data that people happily accept, then?

As Arthur has pointed out, this proposal has as much - or more - to do with online gambling as porn. That someone is frequenting gambling sites could be very embarrassing, and thus just as much misused.

And, of course, we shouldn't forget that one country is very down on its citizens accessing gambling sites in the first place, so claiming a moral high-ground on unfettered access to porn could be viewed as hypocritical.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 5th November 2019 at 02:33 AM.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 06:26 PM   #47
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,632
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
A driver's license is not a primary form of identification. It's a secondary one. In order to get your driver's license, you need to provide primary ID documents - essentially, birth certificate and/or passport. Those are the verified documents.
But a drivers license is still sufficient for proving your identity in almost all cases. That's what i meant.

Quote:
Anyway, I don't pretend to be an expert either in cybersecurity or in Home Affairs' identity verification systems. Like I said before, I'm just saying that according to the submission itself which specifically calls this out, you won't be able to fool this system by holding up someone else's driver's license.
I think this is just an excuse for the Australian government to show just how versatile and useful their their non-crappy system would be, in an attempt to justify its existence.

In reality, mandated facial-recognition tests for identity verification, in order to access stuff on the internet from ones home, would be nothing short of an onerous gimmick that's very, very difficult to make secure in practice.

Technological solutions that allow people to securely verify their identity, so they can access their personal accounts and documents at both public authorities or private companies from home (or any other location) through the internet, already exist and are used by millions of people. In principle these kind of systems could be used to force people to verify they are an adult, in order to be allowed to access pornographic websites.

I realize politicians everywhere often have a tendency to want to reinvent the wheel, and demand that a completely domestic solution be made instead of just copying what's working well abroad, but there's no reason whatsoever to bring in facial recognition.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 06:35 PM   #48
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 64,342
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
I think this is just an excuse for the Australian government to show just how versatile and useful their their non-crappy system would be, in an attempt to justify its existence.
Like I said, this is Home Affairs saying "here's this system that we're already planning to use for other purposes and we think it'll be useful for this purpose too."
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 06:35 PM   #49
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,345
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
I didn't know Australia's internet speed was fast enough to watch porn.
It isn't. We download it to a floppy disk overnight then hang up the modem line and watch it using Media Player.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 11:55 PM   #50
PaKu
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 55
Kids will become very proficient with deepfakes and forging digital documents. And once they get bored with the porn, many "creative" uses for those skills will be put to other things...
PaKu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 12:04 AM   #51
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 64,342
Originally Posted by PaKu View Post
Kids will become very proficient with deepfakes and forging digital documents. And once they get bored with the porn, many "creative" uses for those skills will be put to other things...
Yeah nah, they won't because it won't happen.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 12:34 AM   #52
erlando
Graduate Poster
 
erlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,595
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Pre-internet, you usually needed to show an ID to prove you were an adult when buying an adult magazine at a shop.

I need to be convinced these newer age-verification rules are somehow different.
Apart from the massive invasion of privacy? Having your wank sessions logged (because you know there will be logging) by the government? That difference?
__________________
"If it can grow, it can evolve" - Eugenie Scott, Ph.D Creationism disproved?
Evolution IS a blind watchmaker
erlando is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 01:19 AM   #53
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,930
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
Apart from the massive invasion of privacy? Having your wank sessions logged (because you know there will be logging) by the government? That difference?
Who cares?
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 02:04 AM   #54
erlando
Graduate Poster
 
erlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,595
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Who cares?
About their privacy? Quite a few I would imagine though I could be depressingly wrong.

In the ideal world nobody should need to care because the government would treat these data with the utmost care and protect them from any misuse and leaks. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world.
__________________
"If it can grow, it can evolve" - Eugenie Scott, Ph.D Creationism disproved?
Evolution IS a blind watchmaker
erlando is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.