Churchix: The Face Recognition Event Attendance Desktop Application You've Been Praying For?

from the forgive-me,-for-I-have-scanned dept

Fri, Jun 19th 2015 1:01am — Glyn Moody

Churchix may sound like yet another niche GNU/Linux distro aimed, perhaps, at those who want to free their software as well as their souls, but it turns out to be both godly and down-to-earth (found via @latentexistence):

Churchix is a face recognition event attendance desktop application. Churchix identifies event attending members in videos and photos. All you need to do is enrol high quality photos of your members into the software data base, then connect a live video USB camera or upload recorded videos or photos -- and Churchix will identify your members!

Nothing remotely creepy about your church attendance being recorded automatically, of course, since presumably notes are being kept in more ethereal spheres anyway. But if you're not convinced, the makers of Churchix, Skakash, have more secular locations where you could deploy its facial recognition system. As well as obvious ones like airports and border areas, other possible uses include in casinos, where Skakash suggests there are three classes of people you might want to track: blacklisted individuals, employees and VIPs.

That's a rather telling categorization, because it basically says it doesn't matter whether you are an unwelcome or welcome visitor, or simply there as an employee, the system is designed to keep an eye on you, all the time. That's a hint of where things might be going: a world where everyone is tracked using facial recognition in commercial and public spaces, not just the criminals. The recent walkout by privacy organizations from multi-stakeholder talks because of a failure by companies using face recognition to agree to any privacy-protective code of conduct shows that it will probably take a miracle to avoid that fate.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: church, face recognition
Companies: churchix

21 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2015 @ 2:27am

What are the odds that in the future, face-concealing clothing becomes a more or less permanent fashion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2015 @ 3:09am

Re:
What are the odds that in the future, face-concealing clothing becomes a felony?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2015 @ 4:15am

I've been hoping face recognition technology could be easier to use for the masses
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TheResidentSkeptic (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 6:21am

I think I'll go buy some stock...
... in Stetsons and Ray-Bans. I see a resurgence in big hats and big dark sunglasses coming.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2015 @ 6:27am

Anyone that uses this will lose me as a customer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2015 @ 6:36am

and of course the "privacy" link in the footer is not actually a link...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 6:55am

Re:
What makes you think they'll tell you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 8:06am

Re: Re:
It's been illegal in lots of places for years now. Not a felony, but still...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
testcore (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 9:44am

Likely GPL violation
If it really is a linux-based distro (their site is short on details on that front), the fact that it appears they're not distributing the source would mean that they're violating the GPL.

Also note that the "Terms of Use" in the footer, which might actually describe their use of the GPL, is not actually a link, and there are no accessible ToS.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PRMan, 19 Jun 2015 @ 10:30am

Re: Likely GPL violation
If they wrote their own sealed app and included it on a Linux distro, it's perfectly fine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 10:38am

Face-concealing shields were a conspicuous theme...
...in the Bladerunner movie concept art as shown in an exhibition. There were even paintings of sex parties in which the participants were in acts of congress completely naked except for these helmets.

Finally, I understand those freaky (but very futuristic-looking) face shields.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 10:46am

I suspect facial accessories laced with superbright strobing LEDs...
...just outside the spectrum of human vision (infrared and ultraviolent) may become a big thing. Currently they're the instrument by which activists fool police facial recognition devices, since cameras often use a broader spectrum in order to detect and enhance details.

Also, Hollywood's make-up teams are skilled enough to turn people into completely different people. That technology will rapidly bleed out into the mainstream, especially to blacklisters who are specifically at events to cause trouble and are willing to invest time and money into countermeasures.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
testcore (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 12:19pm

Re: Re: Likely GPL violation
Not true. If you're distributing linux in binary form, the GPL requires you also distribute source.

They don't have to distribute the source for *their* app, but they still need to include GPL'ed sources.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 12:45pm

Re: Re: Re: Likely GPL violation
And they don't have to distribute the source with the binaries. It's sufficient to make the source available at no charge from a download site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 12:48pm

Re: I suspect facial accessories laced with superbright strobing LEDs...
"Hollywood's make-up teams are skilled enough to turn people into completely different people."

But remember what face recognition software is looking at is features that aren't easily obscured with makeup: the distance between eyes and proportions between prominent structural features.

You don't need a full-on Hollywood style makeup job. A few well-place prostheses would do the job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
testcore (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 1:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Likely GPL violation
Absolutely.

Perhaps they send a link when you receive a binary, but there aren't any sources on their site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
orbitalinsertion (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 4:00pm

Also from their site, it looks like if you have a few pics of Jesus from stained glass windows, you could properly identify him whenever he shows up on a piece of toast or a dog's butt.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 6:16pm

So the ideal exploit to get past this software...
...Is to look approximately like Jesus.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TRX (profile), 19 Jun 2015 @ 9:05pm

I'm pretty sure I ran into something similar at a chain restaurant a year ago. A friend and I have lunch there occasionally. On that particular visit, it had been more than six months since we had been there.

When the waitress took our order I started to tell her how I wanted my sandwich prepared. She broke in and rattled off my usual extensive substitutions and additions. I said OK.

It's a high-traffic restaurant, they have a high employee turnover, it had been more than six months since I'd been in there, I'm not particularly memorable, and I'm pretty sure I'd never seen that waitress before. And I'm a cash customer; they've never had my name.

I figured a simple system could be pieced together out of off-the-shelf software. With a hit, the server knows your previous orders and tipping percentage before she comes to your table. If you've paid by card, she knows your name. Personalized service is likely to boost customer satisfaction and create more visits.

It wouldn't have to be 100% accurate, just good enough to give the waitstaff an edge.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 20 Jun 2015 @ 10:08am

Re:
It's more likely that restaurant is IDing customers based on the WiFi beacons from their phones than face recognition (I say based purely on the fact that this has been common practice with larger companies for years now).

"ersonalized service is likely to boost customer satisfaction and create more visits."

Maybe, but personally I can guarantee that if I notice that a place is doing this sort of thing, I would never set foot in that place again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 20 Jun 2015 @ 11:14am

I don't see a problem with a place using biometrics or other devices to ID customers...
...in order to create a better or more consistent experience.

The problem is when that information isn't recognized as privileged, private information and sold to / given to / stolen by third parties for further use.

Google was entirely based on collecting private information and then using it in reasonably benign ways. The problem is that even if the Google itself was able to not abuse that power (which it hasn't -- not entirely) it created a database that was too attractive for other parties such as the state.

It's one of those problems for which we need a (presently elusive) solution. Though Google's step in salting the database is a big one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]