Amazon has introduced a groundbreaking biometric payment system, Amazon One, which allows users to pay for purchases, access loyalty rewards and enter certain restricted areas on Amazon properties all with the wave of a hand. Users who sign up agree to give Amazon data regarding their palm’s unique vein patterns to help verify their identities.

Launched last March 28, this technology is already being used at over 200 Whole Foods locations across 20 states, and Amazon plans to expand it to every Whole Foods in the United States by the end of the year. (Related: More businesses now resorting to BIOMETRICS so that government nannies can literally track everything you do, see and buy.)

The technology is also being adopted by other retailers, such as Panera Bread – appearing in diverse locations like airports, convenience stores, gyms and stadiums.

In a similar manner, TSA has introduced facial recognition technology at airports with a promise that the technology enhances safety and streamlines the travel experience.

Facial recognition is used by the TSA to verify a traveler’s identity by scanning their face. This system captures a live image of the traveler’s face and compares it to the photo on their ID or passport. If the two images match, the traveler is cleared to proceed – often without needing to show physical identification.

For travelers who choose not to use this technology, the TSA continues to offer traditional ID checks. Participation in the facial recognition program is entirely voluntary and those who opt out will not face any delays or negative consequences.

Facial recognition is not just limited to airport security. It is being adopted across various industries, including banking, retail and healthcare – promising benefits like faster service, improved accessibility and a more personalized user experience.

However, as the technology becomes more widespread, so do the risks. These risks include inaccuracies and biases against certain age groups and ethnicities, the vulnerability of stored facial data and the possibility of criminal entities impersonating other individuals.

Biometric technologies spark security concerns

Hafiz Malik, a cybersecurity professor at the University of Michigan, cautioned that these systems are not infallible. Malik pointed out that advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) could potentially enable the creation of fake versions of a person’s voice, handprint or even face.

These AI-generated forgeries could be used to trick biometric payment systems, highlighting the need for robust countermeasures like “liveness detection” – a technology used by Amazon to distinguish between real and fake palms.

Another significant concern is the storage and protection of biometric data. Unlike a stolen credit card, which can be replaced, biometric data can’t be changed if it is compromised. This permanence makes biometric data a highly attractive target for hackers.

Evan Greer, director of the digital rights advocacy group Fight for the Future, warned that trusting a corporation with biometric data also entails trusting that same corporation to keep that data safe. He said corporations have a really terrible track record of keeping people’s personal information safe.

Cynthia Rudin, a Duke University professor, further stressed the potential dangers if such sensitive data falls into the wrong hands.

“They can control you in ways you don’t like,” said Rudin. “Those data sets can be used to control us anywhere in the world, including arresting us, or preventing us from entering stores that don’t want customers in our salary bracket, or who have political views that disagree with the owners of the venues.”

Watch this demonstration of an Amazon One palm scanner.

This video is from the Daily Videos channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• No cash or card allowed: Major supermarkets set to accept only BIOMETRICS payment.
• Mastercard rolls out payment system that uses FACIAL RECOGNITION technology.
• Facial recognition will soon identify shoplifters and ban them from stores, experts say it’s ripe for abuse.

Sources include:

• WSJ.com
• BobsGuide.com
• TSA.gov
• CNBC.com
• Brighteon.com

• Stage 1: Convenience
• Stage 2: Security and Access
• Stage 3: Mandate

We experienced this to some extent with the vaccine passports. At first it made it easier for you to go places. It quickly became a necessity from a security perspective granting the vaccinated the ability to see loved ones in the hospital, access schools, travel, and keep certain jobs. We fell just shy of hitting the full-blown mandate level, other than those poor souls who lost their careers for not getting jabbed.

Biometric identification is burgeoning and we’re already in Stage 1. It’s hitting airports across the country and we can expect it to be ubiquitous for “convenient” air travel very soon.

According to Biometric Update:

Delta has announced that its digital ID program is now expanding to three major airports – Los Angeles (LAX), LaGuardia (LGA), and John F. Kennedy International (JFK), the latter of which launches on December 14th. The program uses biometric face matching to eliminate the need for manual ID checks at checkpoints like bag drop and security.

The program is eligible for customers who have a TSA PreCheck membership, have a free SkyMiles membership, and have the Fly Delta app. They must also have their passport information and a Known Traveler Number stored in their Delta profile.

Eligible customers get an automatic notification in the app when traveling from an airport with the digital ID program. Once they opt in, the Delta Digital ID becomes a part of their SkyMiles profile. Customers can opt out at any time and Delta does not store any biometric data, the announcement notes. The face biometrics capability at the original Delta Digital ID locations is provided by Pangiam.

Once their information is verified, customers can use Delta Digital ID to check bags and move through security without needing to show their physical ID. Individuals go to the line designated for digital IDs with the green “Delta Digital ID” icon and look into the camera at the checkpoint to use their digital IDs in place of physical IDs.

The amount of time saved at security lines varies depending on airport volume, but travelers with Delta Digital IDs enabled spend an average of 30 seconds at bag drop, compared to a standard bag drop time of two minutes.

This is how it starts. Today, biometric identification makes things supposedly easier. This is going to appeal to millions of people as they make it harder and harder for those not on the program to get through the gate. All it will take is a terrorist attack for this to become a security solution.

Will it eventually be mandated? Probably. Will it expand outside of air travel? It already is. Will everyone not living off the grid be pressured to participate? You betcha.

Now, there are DNA sequencing devices that can quickly generate DNA profiles (DNA IDs) anywhere using mobile devices and fully automated processes, and those in power are eyeing DNA as a potential global ID.

Your DNA is more precious than gold for technocrats because it is the irreducible structure of all life on the planet.

DNA can be abused and used against you

Always be skeptical regardless of the hype for DNA as a global ID. Be wary of allegedly beneficial outcomes of a global DNA ID.

Biometric identification solutions have become firmly established in your daily life, whether at security checks at airports or through facial recognition on smartphones. However, the next generation is already waiting.

New DNA-based processes can allegedly ensure precise identification of individuals and raise data protection to a completely new level.

For the longest time, DNA-based methods were reserved for forensic work, such as the definitive identification of disaster victims or the determination of degrees of relationship.

But as technology advances, the latest generation of solutions for confirming identity will be hyped as suitable for use in public service. This is a development with major advantages because for citizens, proof of your own identity is the key to state benefits, education and mobility – at least in theory.

But in reality, many people around the world still do not have a legal identity that can be verified by documents like a birth certificate or passport. Many will claim that this is where the potential of unalterable and unique DNA comes into play, which can sometimes unambiguously identify people if there is doubt.

As DNA is hyped as a global ID, there will be those who claim that the new generation of DNA-based methods offers several far-reaching advances in this area.

Despite the novelty of the idea, DNA-based personal identification is not a new invention. But while forensics practitioners have used this method since the 1980s, highly automated processes have only been available within recent years.

Using the latest technology, certified “Rapid DNA Technology” solutions can generate DNA profiles (DNA IDs) anywhere and within a very short time using only mobile devices and fully automated processes. These processes do not require any special technical or scientific knowledge and allegedly guarantee lossless data generation.

If global DNA IDs are rolled out, they will be marketed as offering many benefits compared to conventional biometric identification methods such as your fingerprints or iris recognition. And since the stored information is enclosed and protected directly in the nucleus of the human cell, the DNA-based solution ensures lifelong immutability and protects against tampering. (Related: Destination, biometrics and more: New cars can track and collect driver data, warn experts.)

If you are concerned about data protection, you may be told that a DNA ID offers an unrivaled level of anonymity. The information stored in forensic or civil databases is purely numerical and does not reveal any information about your ethnic origin, appearance or health status. But if people have access to the right tools, there is a chance that your data can be used against you.

Once created, DNA IDs can be registered and stored in government-controlled databases. The small data size of a DNA ID, measuring only 200 bits, ensures easy storage on conventional chips for smart biometric identification documents such as passports.

DNA identification being hyped as ID technology of the future

Despite these proposed benefits, the general public continues to associate the collection of DNA samples mainly with their use in the field of criminal law.

The resulting skepticism toward DNA-based methods is understandable, but a new classification and assessment is necessary and must take place with education and transparency.

Those who push DNA as a global ID argue that DNA identification is more anonymous and precise than other biometric methods, which can result in a “completely new level of data protection.”

In the past, there were similar reservations about fingerprint matching or iris scans, but public opinion has changed through the years. While some remain skeptical, others trust biometric procedures to unlock their smartphones and feel secure with them.

Those in power tell the public that the same will happen for DNA IDs, especially if they insist on hyping its alleged benefits and the high level of security offered by the technology.

But despite claims that DNA IDs are secure and convenient, wary citizens must keep in mind that even what appears to be a secure way of storing data and maintaining user anonymity can be abused by an individual or a group with the right tools.

Will you risk your safety and privacy for convenience?

Visit PrivacyWatch.news to read more articles about the dangers of biometric data abuse. Watch the video below to learn if hospitals are stealing the DNA of babies.

This video is from the Worldview Report channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• 12 US states now using mobile device driver’s licenses that require face scans to prove your identity.
• Millions of UK students are using BIOMETRICS for school-related activities without parental consent.
• New crypto linked to digital ID forces all users to scan their EYEBALLS using iris-scanning technology.

Sources include:

• Technocracy.news
• BiometricUpdate.com
• Brighteon.com

The latest example comes from California. Biometrics fintech firm PopID invited scrutiny at a student event at the University of Southern California (USC) campus in Los Angeles after leaving no choice to purchase food inside the venue aside from its facial recognition payment system PopPay.

“[It’s] slightly coercive, because you’re not really being given a choice between normal payment methods and using your face, which is a pretty intimate subject matter,” USC student Vera Wang told student paper The Daily Trojan.

PopID explained that the company was “a paid sponsor of promotional events to market our products.” However, the move has invited questions about PopID’s commitment to privacy and data security.

The company, co-founded and seeded by food and retail conglomerate Cali Group, says it complies with the strictest law in the United States regarding facial recognition data, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, the student paper notes that its privacy policy states that it “cannot guarantee the security of your data transmitted to our site.”

Privacy advocates issue warnings

Like many other biometric payment companies, PopID has been busy this year, partnering with restaurants such as Steak ‘n Shake, Tyme’s self-checkout restaurant kiosks, and Samsung’s POS kiosks. Similar efforts are being made by Amazon, Mastercard, Clear and JPMorgan Chase. The latter has piloted palm and face-based payments at the Miami Grand Prix Formula One race in May.

January research from Research and Markets supports the idea that consumers can be reassured that biometrics payments are safe. But privacy advocates have raised concerns about the risk of biometric information being stolen by identity thieves or abused by law enforcement agencies, Bloomberg Law reports.

Digital rights group Fight for the Future, for instance, has been organizing an online petition calling on grocery stores not to include Amazon’s palm-scanning technology as a payment option. The group warns that sensitive data could potentially be abused, hacked or stolen.

Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, managing director of the International Association of Privacy Professionals trade group, notes that companies usually don’t keep raw biometric information but instead store a computer’s interpretation of a physical feature, like a set of numbers.

But other experts, such as Jen King, a privacy and data policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, maintain that hackers or fraudsters could try to combine scans with other pieces of consumer data.

“If I look at an image of a palm, I probably can’t tell it’s you versus me necessarily,” King told Bloomberg. “But that doesn’t say it’s not identifiable, because if it wasn’t identifiable they wouldn’t be using it.”

The U.S. has seen piecemeal efforts to regulate biometric payments, including a state-level bill sponsored by New York State Senator James Skoufis. An earlier request to the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board to allow the use of biometrics for age verification for restricted purchases was tanked, according to a board spokesman.

Meanwhile, similar skepticism about the tech is on the rise in other parts of the world.

Australian privacy group warns about biometrics in retail

The Australian Privacy Foundation is warning that increasing CCTV usage in stores is a major concern. The government is also looking into facial recognition tools with the Attorney-General’s Department recently completing a comprehensive review of the Privacy Act, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

The concerns were sparked with recent investment by Australian supermarkets into surveillance following a surge in shoplifting: Last year it was revealed Kmart and Bunnings introduced facial recognition technology in stores, sparking an investigation by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC).

A more recent subject of controversy is Woolworths. The supermarket chain announced it will invest $40 million on CCTV upgrades, body-worn cameras and other devices. An average Woolworths store has 62 CCTV cameras while self-checkout desks are equipped with six to eight cameras, including an AI system determining whether the correct items are being scanned.

The non-government organization says that while supermarket employees are likely not accessing or analyzing this data, external service providers have this capability. The prospect of the data collected at the supermarket proliferating raises the possibility that biometric technology could be applied to it after the fact, or without customers being aware of it.

“There’s the lack of reciprocity when you have technology like this. You don’t get to know what a company is doing, so you can’t even decide if you don’t want to be paranoid,” says Australian Privacy Foundation Chair David Vaile.

According to Woolworths, stock monitoring cameras record silhouettes of customers or staff, while the self-serve checkout cameras blur faces, blackout PIN pads and are not viewed live. All CCTV footage was stored locally and only accessed by store team leaders and the investigation teams, along with police if necessary, while self-scan checkout footage was stored in Australia.

About the Author

Masha Borak is a technology journalist. Her work has appeared in Wired, Business Insider, Rest of World, and other media outlets. Previously she reported for the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong. Reach out to her on LinkedIn. Article cross-posted from Biometric Update.

The service, in collaboration with Iris ID’s technology, has amassed a staggering 2.5 million identities and is burgeoning at an astonishing rate of around 100,000 new identities monthly. In addition to this, the service has access to fifteen million identities present in other federal government databases.

While this might seem like a boon for law enforcement agencies in tracking down criminals, it raises serious questions about the extent of surveillance and the potential misuse of biometric data.

The fusion of Iris ID’s technology with the FBI’s program has been ongoing since 2014. The service allows access to an enormous repository of iris biometric data coupled with fingerprint and face biometrics.

In a world where data breaches are not uncommon, the protection and ethical use of this sensitive biometric data become paramount.

There is a potential risk of this information falling into the wrong hands or being exploited in ways that infringe upon civil liberties.

The recent integration of presentation attack detection capabilities into the FBI’s service is also worthy of examination. Though intended to thwart deceptive attempts against biometric systems, the wide-reaching surveillance capabilities have tremendous downsides. There is a thin line between safeguarding national security and creating a surveillance state, which could be detrimental to the freedoms and privacy of individuals.

What’s more, Iris ID is working on mobile capabilities, which may extend the reach of this biometric data collection.

While this may be beneficial in high-volume scenarios like prisoner transportation or border control management, it also opens the door for sweeping surveillance that may not be justifiable. The accessibility and mobility of such data collection tools should be weighed carefully against the right to privacy.

Mohammed Murad, Iris ID VP of Global Business & Development, claims that the adoption of the technology is an indicator of the increasing appeal of iris recognition. However, one must ponder whether this appeal is blurring the crucial distinction between security and invasion of privacy.

Article cross-posted from Reclaim The Net.

Biometrics used for transaction verifications tied to government-collected personal data is a digital ID. They want it to be universal. They want it to cover not just financial transactions but every aspect of our lives. This is a control mechanism. As I discussed on a news clip for The JD Rucker Show, what we’re seeing happening in India is what we can expect to see in the United States very, very soon. Here’s the article from Reclaim The Net…

The Indian government is allowing banks to verify individual transactions for those that exceed 2 million rupees annually using iris scans and facial recognition in cases where fingerprint verification fails. The move is an effort to crack down on tax evasion and fraud, according to sources who talked to Reuters, but also highlights major privacy and civil liberties concerns.

A few banks have already started using the option, according to the sources, who asked not to be named because the advisory allowing such verification has not been made public. The verification is optional and is meant to be used in cases where someone has not shared their Permanent Account Number (PAN) card with banks.

The new measure will be used to verify the identity of individuals who have made transactions, both withdrawals and deposits, exceeding 2m rupees in a year if they have shared the Aadhaar biometric identity cards with the banks.

The Aadhaar card, provided by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), carries a unique number linked to someone’s face, iris scan, and fingerprints.

Last month, India’s ministry for finance asked banks to take the “necessary action” on a letter by UIDAI that recommended verification should be done via iris and facial scanning, particularly where fingerprint verification has failed.

However, the letter did not talk about consent.

Alternate Media Source: