Whereas I gave you the benefit of the doubt, (and provided a source to support my position,) you've somehow definitively assessed the reliability of fingerprinting, and conclusively determined that I've been misled. As such, I provide the following sources discussing the poor reliability of fingerprinting (in chronological order, 2001-2013) so that others can steer clear and avoid being misled like I was:

Fingerprinting's Reliability Draws Growing Court Challenges
Will Fingerprinting Stand Up in Court?
Investigation: Forensic evidence in the dock
The Real Crime: 1,000 Errors in Fingerprint Matching Every Year
Study questions reliability of fingerprint evidence
Forensic Tools: What’s Reliable and What’s Not-So-Scientific
Deeper into forensic bias
Fingerprint [Validity]

It's "just that," hm? Sounds legit — though I fail to see how this demonstrates that fingerprinting is "far more reliable than [I've]have been led to believe."

What has this got to do with the reliability of fingerprinting? You wanna know what I'd delight in, is you providing some evidence that supports your claim that fingerprinting is far more reliable I've been led to believe.

"What [DHS] thinks about the Fifth Amendment"

Your username nicely captures my response to this ruling.

Travel is a right not a "privilege," governments' opinion to the contrary notwithstanding. Those propaganda posters in your local DMV are just that — propaganda. Free travel included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but considering how much weight even the Constitution has in this country, I don't expect the situation to change for the better.

I didn't; I always vote Green or Libertarian, but not enough others value their civil liberties enough to join me.

Fingerprint matching has no "reliability standard" to speak of, and is likely far less reliable than you may have been led to believe.

Please see PBS's Frontline: The Real CSI for an overview of some of the terrible shit that happened (and is still happening) thanks for forensic "science" — to quote from Twelve Monkeys, "Science ain't an exact science with these clowns." I've provided links to the aforementioned documentary below:

https://video.pbs.org/video/2223977258
http://kickass.to/pbs-frontline-the-real-csi-2012-480p-hdtv-x264-karma-t6324747.html

Speak for yourself.

Thanks for that important tip.

I've been using Safe-Mail (on account of Hushmail's three-week inactive account deletion); so far I haven't been disappointed. Yes, it's run from USA's best pal Israel, but as far as I'm aware, Israel isn't shy about asserting sovereignty (though by no means would I count on that to keep a web-mail account private). I've been unable to find a private/secure web-mail provider located in a place with chilly US relations — Safe-Mail is the best I've come up with so far.

EFF Action: Demand Answers Now! [Direct e-mail form to contact POTUS and your senators+House rep]:
https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=9260
https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=9297 [Form for non-US citizens; directed at implicated corporations]

The links below are to resources of the personal-privacy type, as opposed to the those intended to help bring about change:

EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project [Guide to surveillance-avoidance tools and techniques for individuals]:
https://ssd.eff.org/

EFF's HTTPS Everywhere [Chrome/FF plug-in enforces HTTPS on compatible sites using rule-list (hundreds included)]:
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere

https-finder: Plug-in for HTTPS Everywhere users; auto-detects sites' HTTPS support and adds them to rule-list:
https://code.google.com/p/https-finder/

Privacy-oriented search engines:
https://duckduckgo.com/ [Only search engine on EFF's Organizational Member list]
https://ixquick.com/ [Provides HTTPS proxy through which search results may be accessed]

Privacy/security-oriented free web-mail providers:
https://www.safe-mail.net/
https://www.hushmail.com/

ACLU anti-surveillance petition:
https://www.aclu.org/secure/repeal-the-surveillance-state2

I agree with you; I support immediate public disclosure as well.

The reasons I wrote what I did last night were that a) I didn't want to sidetrack the discussion into one about immediate versus "responsible disclosure" in general, and b) I wanted to make a point that might persuade those in support of "responsible disclosure" that Microsoft has shown that it doesn't deserve whatever benefits it may receive from the practice, since they've been colluding with a known hacker organization that's been violating our constitutional rights for years.

Further, in my view the software industry (as a whole) has shown that it doesn't genuinely support "responsible disclosure," what with all the cases we've heard about in which white-hats have been thanked with prosecution, intimidation, academic expulsion, etcetera, for trying to "do the right thing." Thus, I support immediate disclosure not as a form of (unjust) collective punishment against software vendors, but as an act of self-preservation, while acting to inform the greatest number of potential victims so that they may take defensive action (as you pointed out).

I'm not sure what an "illegal" torrent is, but you might be interested in this: Law and Order SVU S14E24 720p HDTV X264-DIMENSION