Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

New Amazon Scanner Can Identify Shoppers By The Veins In Their Hand (usatoday.com) 53

Posted by EditorDavid from the look-inside dept.
An anonymous reader quotes USA Today: What if you could pay for your groceries using your veins?

Amazon filed a patent for technology that could identify you by scanning the wrinkles in the palm of your hand and by using a light to see beneath your skin to your blood vessels. The resulting images could be used to identify you as a shopper at Amazon Go stores. It was previously reported that the Seattle-based tech giant might install these hi-tech scanners in Whole Foods grocery stores. However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published an application on Thursday that suggests the e-commerce behemoth sets its sites on Amazon Go stores...

While fingerprint scanners have been around for years, Amazon hopes to innovate by developing a personal identification system that you don't have to touch. Imagine hovering your hand in front of an infrared light as a camera snaps two images -- one from the surface, and one that looks for "deeper characteristics such as veins." An internal computer system would then identify you based on that information.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Amazon Scanner Can Identify Shoppers By The Veins In Their Hand More

New Amazon Scanner Can Identify Shoppers By The Veins In Their Hand

Comments Filter:

  • I don't know, how much are they giving me for each vein? And will they grow back?

    • I don't think they're giving you anything.

      Headline:

      New Amazon Scanner Can Identify Shoppers By The Veins In Their Hand

      Reality:

      Amazon filed a patent

    • I don't know, how much are they giving me for each vein?

      Once your hand is recognized, the checkout machine sticks a needle in your vein, and draws out enough blood to cover your bill.

      You get a discount for rare blood types.

      This is described in another Amazon patent titled, "A Method and Process for Paying with a Pint of Blood".

      Amazon is also planning to offer this hand recognition technology as a Ring feature. When someone rings your doorbell, the hand data will be uploaded, compared and stored in the Criminal Doorbell Ringing database.

  • Obviously, as with any biometric or other identifying method, you would pay with your personal data, making you trackable throughout every shop where you buy.
  • What could possibly go wrong?

  • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:amazon has ruined grocery. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bjwest ( 14070 ) on Sunday December 29, 2019 @08:30PM (#59568744)

      Amazon has NOT ruined grocery. They bought out a single chain and changed it's operating procedures. A chain where those people being complained about not being able to shop at anymore were never it's customers to begin with. If you're poor or strapped for grocery cash, you didn't go to Whole Foods. Don't like it? Go to the Kroger down the street, or Aldies, Safeway or the myriad of other grocery stores available where these locations are and/or are not. These stores aren't the only source of groceries for the poor. Hell, they're not even located where the poor shop for the most part, so they aren't even and never were A source of groceries for the poor.

      TLDR: The only thing Amazon ruined was Whole Foods Market.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Fly Swatter ( 30498 )
      Sounds more like Whole Foods failed as a successful business model and someone bought the scraps and did whatever they wanted. If you don't like it stop going there and let their new business model also fail.
    • Scumazone Crime.
  • Repeat after me: biometrics are not authentication.

    • Nonsense, a biometric system that can uniquely identify a human could be used for authentication. A password would be inferior.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Biometrics are not authentication. They are identification. Beginners often confuse the two, no matter how important it is to understand the difference.

        Identification does not contain any proof of identity, it is just a claim. Anybody can make that claim by copying the statement made. This may be easier or harder, but so far it has always been possible eventually. Authentication proves that an identity claim is true.

        • Your pedantry is pointless. There is no problem with a person believing that a good biometric identification system would be great for authentication.

          your words are useless.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by gweihir ( 88907 )

            As I said, beginners often do not understand the difference. Cretins (like you) in addition believe they already have all the answers, when in fact, they know pretty much nothing.

            • you are the one trying to look like an expert but are saying nothing useful at all on the subject.

          • If you can clone or copy my ID in some way sufficient to fool a computer to make financial transaction on my behalf then no, absolutely fucking not ok. You're not buying food or a car or taking out a loan or anything else using my ID and some jackass at the bank will insist it was me and not fraud because a faux security genius like you will tell them it's ok because it was good enough. Stfu and get out of the security advice business.

            • You are stupid, I posited a system that could uniquely identify a human. That means no other person could fool it. What part of that was beyond your ken?

        • >"Biometrics are not authentication. They are identification."

          They also show no authorization or intent. The only way to have that is with something you know and/or must do (PIN, password, active signature). This is why forged biometrics are so dangerous- you can't change/revoke them when they are "stolen," and if systems are designed to trust that they imply intent, the forgeries will work to gain access.

        • This may be easier or harder, but so far it has always been possible eventually.

          Isn't that true for anything? Someone can steal your phone, hack your PIN, lift your fingerprints, and even crack 4096-bit RSA using the proverbial $5 wrench.

          Nothing is absolutely safe.

          The best you can do is use multiple factors, and biometric should be one of those factors: e.g. Password + phone + vein scan.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gweihir ( 88907 )

            You miss the point.

            • You miss the point.

              Perhaps because there wasn't one.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by gweihir ( 88907 )

                There was.

                Ok, I will make it even more clear: Biometrics cannot be changed when stolen and you usually have limited (fingers, eyes) or no (face) alternative samples go give. Passwords and other actual authenticators can easily be changed, as they are not fixedly tied to your identity. And that is what makes the distinction important: You cannot easily change an identity, buy you can typically change something used for authentication with reasonable effort.

          • The best you can do is use multiple factors, and biometric should be one of those factors: e.g. Password + phone + vein scan.

            And if password + phone + vein scan is not more reliable *and* is more expensive than password + phone, then the vein scan is both redundant *and* a waste of money.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by narcc ( 412956 )

          Someone (I can't find or remember who) once suggested that the reason that our wealth disparity hasn't lead to open rebellion is that the masses have access to many of the same non-essentials as the elite. They have the same movies and television shows, the same consumer electronics, many of the same popular brands, etc. The division, at least as far as cultural products are concerned, virtually doesn't exist.

          When we start to see stores for the rich and stores for the poor, that illusion of equality isn't

      • a biometric system that can uniquely identify a human...

        ...does not exist?

  • Somebody will find a way to fool this. And then the database will be hacked or leak. And then what? Surgery on your hand?

  • ... that forces me to wear gloves most of the time! Also, long sleeves, a hat and sunglasses. And it's a medical necessity. Who would have thought it'd also be beneficial to me!

  • Not new at all (Score:5, Informative)

    by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Sunday December 29, 2019 @08:47PM (#59568778)

    Deep vein scan is not new. It has been used for many years as a "safe" (privacy-respecting) biometric. I don't know how they will get a patent on this. In any case, I have posted this info in the past. Here it is again:

    Fingerprints (or other surface prints) and DNA should not be used for biometrics. They are unsafe and not privacy-friendly.

    Using fingerprints or DNA and allowing a third-party to have access to that data is unacceptable. Not only because the government and big business should have no need to track what people are doing but because they should not have fingerprint registration data (which will be horribly abused) .

    Once you give this data to the government or big business, it will NEVER be erased or restricted, regardless of claims, policies, or laws- it will go into huge databases and shared between agencies and used however they want for as long as they want. Even worse, with every crime investigation, you will be searched without probable cause. It is a genie that can't be put back into the bottle.

    Fingerprints are something you leave all over the place all the time. They are easy to lift, copy, and forge. Easy to fake, easy to use to frame people. Time after time they have been shown to be poor for security and yet very effective at tracking people.

    DNA is even worse. Like fingerprints, you leave it all over the place all the time. Samples can be lifted and planted and analyzed. DNA is more than a means to ID, it contains very sensitive information about you.

    There is only one safer and practical biometric I know of- that is deep vein palm scan. That registration data cannot be readily abused. It can't be latently collected like DNA, fingerprints, and face recognition can. You have to know you are registering/enrolling when it happens. You don't leave evidence of it all over the place. When you go to use it, you know you are using it every time. And on top of all that, it is accurate, fast, reliable, unchanging, live-sensing, and cheap. If you must participate in a biometric, this is the one you should insist on using.

    Example: http://www.m2sys.com/palm-vein... [m2sys.com]
    More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    We also need to realize that IT IS NOT EVERYONE'S BUSINESS WHAT WE ALL DO. The first step in securing freedom is privacy. When you are tracked, you are losing your freedom, whether you realize it or not. You should not have to positively ID yourself for ALL transactions. A good example is age verification. There is an important place for anonymity and semi-anonymity in a free society.

    • Mod this guy up.
      Refreshingly Informative.

    • It's not "privacy-friendly". CASH is privacy-friendly. It still logs your identity and where you bought the groceries (your location at a given time). Privacy is anonymity. Anonymity is privacy.

      • >"It's not "privacy-friendly". CASH is privacy-friendly. "

        It is privacy-friendly compared to other biometrics. It is never privacy-friendly to require biometrics for transactions. Hence, my example with age verification in the last paragraph. If the retailer needs to restrict access based on age, that should not mean they have the right or need to know WHO the individual is, only that they are "of age." Yet, there are retailers out there now who are SCANNING ID's for age verification (instead of just

    • "a good example is age verification" Privacy rights but no dignity rights? Age verification is only needed for historical accuracy / keeping of world records. Beyond that it is a farce. If you are lucky enough to die of natural causes it only means you will be discriminated against for 20-35% of your life. But "oh biology says not fully formed brain xxx age every single human exact same age". No. That's as scientific and useful as frenology. Will you be measuring my skull next to make sure it isn't "creti

      • >"a good example is age verification" Privacy rights but no dignity rights? Age verification is only needed for historical accuracy / keeping of world records"

        Not sure what you are talking about. I was talking about laws that require age verification when purchasing certain products.

  • Caveat: the tech I'm referring to scans a portion of your wrist and identifies each person uniquely by the veins visible there (rather than in one's palm). However... similar, no? (I suppose since one's wrist is clearly different than one's palm, the tech I'm thinking of is not a case of actual prior art).

    ATMs (though, in my experience, not all of them) in South Korea have offered identification by veins (in one's wrist) for about 10 years or so, apparently with no problems - according to Namuwiki: https [namu.wiki]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gtall ( 79522 )

      Wait until Amazon pairs this with AI to predict what you want to buy before you buy it. Then they'll have it delivered and waiting for you at home. Given the inane procedures for returning items, they'll have the sales equivalent of throwing spaghetti against the wall and living on what sticks.

  • who needs to "chip" the masses for societal tracking when scanning veins can accomplish the same task.
    meanwhile on CSPAN:
    "We Promise not to share all this technology and data with the Government". - Jeff Bezos.

  • Jeff Bezos is a vampire
    the slippery slope begins

  • I do not wish to have any part of my body that can be cut off and used as biometric data.

    Please do not build any system that makes it advantageous to gouge out my eyes, cut off a finger, or in this case, a hand.

  • About a decade ago, one of the larger hospital systems in North Carolina (CMC, now Atrium Health) deployed hand-scanning biometric readers at check-in. I remember the nurse explaining how the scanner uses the pattern of veins in your hand to identify you. The elderly woman in line in front of me looked like she was being asked to pet a rattlesnake, so after a moment the nurse went on, "or I could just get your name and your date of birth."

    While this one isn't anything new, it still seems like a solution in

  • This is not exactly a novel idea. An early form of this biometric was pioneered in Japan years ago. But it is true, there has not yet been wide commercialization in the United States. Still, companies usually try to file for patents that can be defended worldwide. I'm guessing that the Japanese patent has expired.

  • From the some big tech co racked up another patent they'll probably never actual use except for a nice lil profitable lawsuit: There are many *many different kinds of biometrics that have been researched over the past several decades. This one's not even new (as cited in multiple previous comments)..

    Is the point that they're trying to make us healthier by eliminating shared points of contact? We already have multiple in-practice biometric methods that are all easier to use than holding your hand suspended o

  • Scientists all over the World are convinced, the most unique features are just outside scrotum. Businesses agree, that woul also be the most convenient form of paying at the store or with under the table webcams, which are already installed long ago at all public places with the fantastic intent - what if this someday is necessary for the World progress. We have bright future with the technology advancing us in the hands of simpletons. No more need for smart people to advance the civilization.

Slashdot Top Deals

System restarting, wait...

Close