back to article Breaking news: BBC FINALLY spots millions of mugshots on cop database

The BBC's Newsnight team lurched into action last night by "revealing" that "up to 18 million" mugshots of Brits were being stored on a huge police database without proper regulatory oversight. Setting aside the fact that we already knew back in December that many of the photos kept on the Police National Database (PND) …

Page:

  1. D Moss Esq

    Double whammy black eye for the police

    QUOTE

    MacGregor told the Beeb last night that there were "grounds for doubts" about the reliability of facial recognition tech.

    UNQUOTE

    Quite right.

    There's lots of evidence that the technology doesn't work, – http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/14/biometric_id_delusion/ – and no evidence that it does.

    Not just an invasion of privacy but also a waste of money. The police may want to be seen to be "doing something" but this is a double whammy black eye and not a feather in the cap at all (Catch-22).

    1. TeeCee Gold badge
      Unhappy

      Ever seen a test of eyewitness identification? (Fake crime, take statements from unsuspecting witnesses, use those who reckon they got a good look for lineup / mugshot ID).

      Makes automated facial recognition look ruddy infallible by comparison. If you really must have a fucked up method of identifying people, the one that's not admissible as evidence strikes me as preferable.

    2. Mark H

      Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

      Well there is some evidence that it does work, as the reporter tried it on Newsnight last night and it worked perfectly. He had his mugshot taken and then went outside where a Police Officer identified him with his wearable camera - scary stuff!

      I wonder how much the police have spent on all this. Apparently they managed to get 8 million records into the system within about 10 months - quite some going and must have cost a bit to pull off.

      1. Bob Wheeler
        FAIL

        Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

        The problem with facial recognition systems is it depends on how old the 'reference' photo is.

        I recently came through passport control at Heathrow, and it took the system around a dozen scans of before it could decide if my face matched my 5 year old passport photo.

        There have been past El Reg articles on who good, or not, the system the US Homeland department, and also the scrapped UK ID cards, all the same issue, with 'old' reference photos.

        1. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
          Coat

          @BobWheeler I thought facial recognition worked by looking at the separation of eyes and other features that shouldn't be affected by the age of the photo. But according to Wikipedia, some systems do perform a crude statistical comparison with a reference image, and that would be affected by aging. So I guess it depends what system the police are using.

          But either way, Facebook is a handy public database of names and recent photos. They might even arrest a few genuine cat buglers. (Yeah, mine's the one with the moggy in the pocket: his canine accomplice is holding my canary hostage at an undisclosed kennel.)

          1. DJV Silver badge

            @Brewster's Angle Grinder

            "cat buglers"

            It's the buggers with trombones that cause havoc in my neighbourhood!

        2. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

          "The problem with facial recognition systems is it depends on how old the 'reference' photo is."

          This is why you're also not allowed to smile/look happy in passport photos. To give the immigration machines a fighting chance, your photo needs to look like you, tired, pissed off after a long flight and long queue. And then being directed to the 'express' queue where you can gurn for the amusement of the people queuing around you. It would probably be easier, faster and more accurate if they just flashed your photo up on a screen and let your fellow travellers vote on if you were you, or not.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

            "This is why you're also not allowed to smile/look happy in passport photos" - ah, so if we smile whilst commiting a crime then we will never be recognised by the system!! :-) er I mean :-|

      2. SolidSquid

        Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

        There were tests done a few years ago on fingerprint databases in the US. Although they only got access to a limited amount of fingerprint data (iirc it was only one state), they were still able to hit something like 2000 false positives using the standard used by police and FBI. This is the risk that comes in with having a large data set, the more data the more specific you have to be to avoid falsely tying someone to a crime

      3. Archaon
        Black Helicopters

        Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

        "I wonder how much the police have spent on all this. Apparently they managed to get 8 million records into the system within about 10 months - quite some going and must have cost a bit to pull off."

        More to the point I'm shocked that a public sector IT system appears to...work? That almost gives me the confidence to suggest that it could have done the double whammy and actually come in on or under budget.

        Nah. Crazy talk, that.

        1. Otto is a bear.

          Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

          Sadly, quite a few public sector IT systems work, it's just that they ain't news

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Double whammy black eye for the police

        Much like the pre-cached publicity shots when they launch their new Faster Media websites, let's see someone prove in "real surroundings" that it is half reliable and not pre-programmed

    3. Christoph

      Don't worry - it's 100% reliable

      From the Beeb's website:

      "Andy Ramsay, identification manager at Leicestershire Police, told Newsnight the force now had a database with 100,000 custody photos.

      He said searches of the database using facial recognition were 100% reliable in cases where there were clear images, and could be completed in seconds."

      So you can be reassured that your photos are safe in the hands of an incompetent prat who couldn't recognise a clue if it smashed him over the head.

    4. g e

      Mike Barton looked (physically) a lot to me...

      Like someone who has snout firmly in trough.

      In fact I think he even had a bit of something still stuck on the end of his nose, while he was effectively saying he was gleefully exploiting a loophole.

      OK for them, not for us, he certainly seemed to think he was much more equal than everyone else.

  2. Gordon 10
    Thumb Up

    Does it matter if the beeb were late?

    The more times this gets dug up - the higher the fractional likelihood of something getting done about it.

    Especially in an election year.

    1. Archaon

      Re: Does it matter if the beeb were late?

      Not in itself no. But one would suggest that investigating issues that are somewhat older would perhaps be better suited to a current affairs program (i.e. Panorama) rather than Newsnight?

      1. vogon00

        Re: Does it matter if the beeb were late?

        Not really suitable for Panorama...perhaps a more apt program would be "You've been framed"?

    2. Chris 3

      Re: Does it matter if the beeb were late?

      Personally, I think Newsnight did it on purpose to see if they could give the reg staffer some kind of smugness-embolism.

      Did Kelly survive? That's what I want to know.

  3. James 51

    When people talking about old fashioned police work, I doubt that had phrenology in mind.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    In other news,

    sales of Burka's and David Cameron Face Masks have both increased by 200%

    Don't PC Plod realise that if they go around holding piccies of at least 30% of the UK Population then more and more people will seek to avoid being snapped.

    It is not only crims that don't want their picture on this Database.

    Posting AC because one target on my back is enough

    1. Tom 7

      Re: In other news,

      I find a black balaclava keeps you warm - and rapidly inside.

      Baklava is nice too and you dont get pains in not normally visible body areas.

  5. The Sod Particle
    Black Helicopters

    Erm...

    Quote

    "It is important that images of those who are of no ongoing concern to the police are not held longer than necessary or used in warranted ways."

    UnQuote

    does that mean that they can be used in unwarranted ways?

    1. dogged

      Re: Erm...

      without a warrant, certainly.

  6. AndrueC Silver badge
    Facepalm

    MacGregor told the Beeb last night that there were "grounds for doubts" about the reliability of facial recognition tech.

    That's strange. It always works on TV. It can spot a terrorist wearing a fake beard and dark glasses in the middle of a crowd of people. What could possibly be wrong with it?

    1. Flywheel

      Never let a bit of doubt spoil a perfectly good arrest. If you're really unlucky you'll get tasered and your DNA sample will join the millions of others stored "just in case".

    2. breakfast Silver badge
      Trollface

      Also the interface on TV is always incredibly slow, showing each face in turn as it flicks through them. That always seems like weirdly stupid design to me- what are we going to do with the glimpses of all those faces? - but then I do watch films and worry more about the realism of the user interfaces they are using than the implausible stunts so it is more than possible that I am a total idiot.

    3. Otto is a bear.

      Interestingly

      Another BBC documentary showed a system that tracks people through a crowd using CCTV cameras around central London. Seemed to work fine.

  7. smudge
    FAIL

    What purpose?

    One of the requirements of the Data Protection Act is that personal data is used only for the purpose for which it was collected.

    "Barton also said he was "unashamed" about keeping the photos of innocent Brits on the database because the police apparently needed them "for different purposes"."

    Oh dear. Epic fail.

    1. hplasm
      Thumb Up

      Re: What purpose?

      Also: Surely the police have just one purpose?

    2. Richard 22
      Coat

      Re: What purpose?

      The Daily Mash has a suggestion on the "different purposes";

      http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/narcissistic-britons-worried-they-might-not-be-on-police-photo-database-2015020394995

    3. Graham Marsden
      Big Brother

      @smudge - Re: What purpose?

      > One of the requirements of the Data Protection Act is that personal data is used only for the purpose for which it was collected.

      Yeah, but there's a lovely weaselly cop-out clause that adds an exception for "the prevention, detection or investigation of a crime".

    4. Otto is a bear.

      Re: What purpose?

      One purpose for holding images of innocent people is missing persons. Another is searching for wanted people who haven't been convicted, or persons of interest (suspects), how would ports and airports know who to watch for without their photo. There are lots of legitimate uses for photographs, and the MK1 eyeball is also employed. Don't forget the Police also have access to the DVLA database so they can match your face to your driving licence if they stop you, amongst other things.

      1. Fr. Ted Crilly Silver badge

        Re: What purpose?

        'One purpose for holding images of innocent people is missing persons. Another is searching for wanted people who haven't been convicted, or persons of interest (suspects),'

        Oh you mean innocent people then, what could possibly go wrong eh.

      2. Tom 38

        Re: What purpose?

        Don't forget the Police also have access to the DVLA database so they can match your face to your driving licence if they stop you, amongst other things.

        They can look at specific records in the DVLA database. They are not allowed to search through each photo on the DVLA database to compare it to CCTV, and then use that as "evidence".

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    People are concerned that their photo might be in the police database, yet they are happy to post their photo's all over facebook and other internet sites.

    Of course nobody wants to be in an identity parade in case they get wrongly fingered for a crime. But if the police have a photo of somebody they want to interview, and there's no match in the PND, I don't see any technical reason why they couldn't run their face recognition technology against facebook.

    1. Tom 38

      Of course nobody wants to be in an identity parade in case they get wrongly fingered for a crime. But if the police have a photo of somebody they want to interview, and there's no match in the PND, I don't see any technical reason why they couldn't run their face recognition technology against facebook.

      I hope you see a moral reason sometime soon.

    2. Swarthy
      WTF?

      @AC

      That's a bit of an odd proposition, coming from an AC.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      yet they are happy to **voluntarily** post **somebody's** photo's all over facebook and other internet sites.

      FTFY.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    False positives?

    Doesn't the arithmetic of false positives apply here just as it does to the mass interception of emails phone calls etc?

    These folk are looking for a particular needle in a sizeable haystack.

    The more photos in the database, the larger the haystack, and the more misidentified results there will be, diverting limited police Human Resources off on wild goose chases.

    What could possibly go right?

    1. Strange Fruit

      Re: False positives?

      Ignoring the moralities for the moment, if the automatic matching comes up with 1 true positive and 199 false positives then it's not going to take long for a pair of human eyeballs to narrow it down a lot further

      1. Mark 85

        Re: False positives?

        But given the way thing work at this, won't that mean that at least 100 will be invited down to the local cop shop?

    2. JDC

      Re: False positives?

      Only if face recognition is the only lead they have - in most cases they'll also have an address, a reason the person's in the database (even if innocent, said person was presumably arrested on suspicion of a particular crime), etc. Even if 100 false positives turn up the police should be able to narrow that down considerably.

      Still not a justification for holding innocent people's data, but it does show that it's not such a problem.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: False positives?

        @JDC

        Not too long ago, Plod was arresting all sorts of people with the wrong address, wrong age, wrong physical appearance, etc on the basis of false positive DNA matches. And then forced them to prove their innocence; and leave their details on the PND because they had been arrested on suspicion of ...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: False positives?

      And also false negatives - wanted terrorist/criminal/missing person saunters past policeman whose helmet cam fails to match him to the photo in the system.

  10. Chris G

    "That is why we are currently reviewing the framework"

    Translates as" We will delay any changes as long as posssible in thr hope that everybody will forget about it".

  11. TheProf

    Kill the messenger.

    Apart from being 6 weeks behind The Register what have the BBC done to deserve another snippy article?

    They certainly didn't "claim(ing) a scoop". I heard 'The BBC has learned' but no mention of a scoop.

    Newsnight certainly didn't defend the police. Both guests in the studio attacked the police in this matter. In fact only the police officer put up any sort of defence of their behaviour.

    What did we learn from Newsnight? Depends who you are. El Reg readers: probably not so much. Newsnight viewers: probably enough to have their opinion of the police taken down another notch.

    What have we learned from El Reg? Well I've learned that tabloid tactics aren't just used by the print media.

  12. Cynical Observer
    Mushroom

    Screamed in Despair when this bit was broadcast

    Evan Davis: For a year or so you have been introducing the unconvicted into the database as I understand it and using facial recognition software knowing that a court has asked you not to do that

    Chief Constable Mike Barton: Well no! I am unashamed about keeping unconvicted photographs in this because we need them for different purposes than DNA and fingerprints and they are not covered by the same legislation.

    Essentially that amounted to a Chief Constable saying "Judges? Pah! I don't care what they order!"

    There should be alarm bells ringing on so many levels!

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Screamed in Despair when this bit was broadcast

      Paxman would have destroyed him after that. Can't get the staff these days.

    2. Red Bren
      Big Brother

      Re: Screamed in Despair when this bit was broadcast

      > Essentially that amounted to a Chief Constable saying "Judges? Pah! I don't care what they order!"

      That's probably due to the way that politicians have taken to passing knee-jerk anti terror/paedo/whatever legislation that permits gross infringement of civil liberties on the say-so of a senior police officer, rather than requiring judicial oversight. Chief Constable Barton has obviously got used to this lack of accountability and doesn't expect to face it any time soon.

  13. eJ2095

    How do you know...

    If you are on there....

    Oh yeh the police ask you to send a photo in with a SAE and they can check.....

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like