Both lanes at SYD (and MEL) use facial recognition. One extracts the photo on the epassport chip (AUS ppts only)and compares to you standing in front of the kiosk to decide if you are the passport holder. The other looks up a photo held in a database which 'enrolled' users (mainly QF crew and Platinum FF) had a photo taken for. Enrollment for this system finished years ago as epassports came about.

Both these (they were only ever intended as proof of concepts - political masters not withstanding))will be replaced with the permanent solution mid next year. This is already in use at BNE and very soon CNS.

To access data on the chip (photo/name/dob), the check digits from the machine readable zone on the passport need to be supplied to 'unlock' the chip. This is known as Basic Access Control (BAC). Theory being without the passport bio page details you can't read the chip. Hackers say this can be broken - but this is the current international (ICAO i think) standard. I believe there is a higher standard access control being mooted by some authorities.

flyby_kiwi

"..............despite the suspicions and paranoia expressed by a few."

You may very well eat your words, when at some stage in the future you won't even be able to F**t without the govenment knowing.

You don't think it will happen? I strongly advise you to think again.

From a pax point of view, the Egate in the UAE airports is a huge bonus to those of us that live here.
You swipe your gate card, the door opens and you put your finger on the pad...done in seconds and you don't spend bl00dy hours queuing up for the passport control officer...absolutely brilliant, it must have saved my wife and I literally days of queuing in the past 2 years.

HNY all.

The biometric passport can contain fingerprint data, though the Australian one uses a picture of the holder only, at this time.

Singapore uses a similar system to Hong Kong with a smart card and a finger print. However immigration at the main terminals at Changi is usually so efficient little time is saved. Main benefit would be at the budget terminal or land check points.

Singapore is very strong on security, citizens and permanent residents are fingerprinted and have to carry a bar coded identity card. This card has a thumb print on the back which can be matched to you in seconds using a special scanner. Before you can rent any acommodation the landlord must check your passport to confirm you are legally in the country.

Australia is a difficult country to enter but once in relatively easy to disappear. Singapore is the opposite, with very few countries requiring visas.

The absence of illegal immigrants has considerable advantages regarding the burden on the health and wefare systems, crime and terrorism. Wotrth giving your fingerprints for.

I think the argument has already been partially presented about this being dangerous (wrong place at wrong time - and even worse now, not having access to a lawyer and trial to prove your innocence if they think your a terrorist), and people are using the "i've got nothing to hide" argument. The problem with this is, "nothing to hide" is wrong - EVERYBODY has got something to hide. Everybody is doing something wrong or illegal somewhere. You think you dont ? Have you downloaded a song off the internet? Ever driven your car too fast above the speed limit, only for a few seconds accidently, or driven while tired? Ever driven home from the pub 2 minutes around the corner *probably* on the edge of 0.05? Walked away from the shop after they put the wrong value in the register? Claimed that home office supply on tax even though you dont use it for work? If a government can criminalize a society, then they have ultimate control because nobody wants to get in trouble with the law.

If your bored and have the time, google the essay "I've got nothing to hide, and other misunderstandings of privacy" by Daniel Solove.

The "suspicious" and "paranoia" of our society should be well respected members - they are the people who have so far lobbied against national ID cards and other invasions of privacy. If you dont want gps units installed in your car monitoring your speed, location and activities [a hypothetical], the "paranoia" are the people who will complain to the press about it.

As for privacy with biometric data - different people have different standards of privacy. At the end of the day, it is not a computer looking at your information (although fishnet data mining is another topic altogether), but another human being. If you are not comfortable with somebody else knowing about your most intimate details, then your privacy has been invaded. All the girls out there with butterfly tatto's near your privates - I bet you did that for your boyfriend, not the 50 year old immigration officer's amusement. If you dont understand this - what level of privacy would you tolerate another person knowing information about you? Would you be comfortable with biometric data such as fingerprints or iris? How about security cameras watching everywhere you go? How about somebody at telstra seeing which porn sites you are looking up on the internet? How about cameras in your own home watching you have sex? Why do you have curtains in your living room and bedroom. After all - your not doing anything wrong, so what have you got to hide?

Shagpile

A very good post and well written.

Until corruption is rooted out of society this information is liable to fall into "wrong hands" somewhere along the line.

just a thought, i reckon it'd be pretty cool if ASIC holders could use their ASIC's as a passport type thing, it'd make it so much easier for flight crew with a documentation side of things, Less papers make things easier, having an ASIC (or equivalent) as a passport could make things for flight crews so much easier.
But... It'd cost money and Mr Man at the top doesn't like spending money on things that don't assist him

As mentioned the HK system is great: absolutely no contact with grumpy immigration staff. If they could just reduce the processing time from 30secs to say 10secs (i've adopted the typical HK every second counts mentality....) ;)

The old lines oft trotted out.."if you have nothing to hide..."
etc etc
Thats not the point, in fact, thats even CLOSE to the point:=

Make no mistake, this technology is far more about control and data gathering, than it ever will be about "protection".
Now off in sleepy old NZ some may think that this is the answer to most of the problems of border security/identity theft....when the reality is much more akin to another layer of state imposed beauracracy that lacks any real practical value.
Still not convinced? come over to the UK..more "data protection" laws than you can shake a Jihadi's fist at....and yet millions of innocent people have been left potentially exposed thanks to ministerial blunders, and lax procedures....and you think it won't happen there?

Hopefully they will position this equipment on the way out of NZ to stop the bloody Kiwi's ruining our country. If this doesn't work I suggest a strategically positioned firing range on the east coast of OZ so we can get some shooting practice....2 birds with 1 stone stuff.;)