STOP CALLING IT PARANOIA! FFS, This stuff is being used to track people that go to protests.
404 needs to shove their paranoia and normalize using truth and real words and not hedging like CNN or something.
I don't disagree so curious, what would be your title instead?
Zenni eyewear: the urban surveillance countermeasure you didn't know you need.
-or-
Why the feds and Wal Mart hate Zenni eyewear.
Or just to change the obnoxious adjective
"Zenni’s Anti-Facial Recognition Glasses are Eyewear for Our Dystopian Age"
Replace "paranoid" with "highly surveilled." Just say what it is.
Easy swap out.
Even those makeup are kinda useless since they can track you to your door, see the cars you got in, the people you met, see if those people posted on social media if they know someone trying anti-facial recognition methods, etc. They can easily make a list of people prone to use anti-facial recognition that lives in or walks by certain areas then recognize them by body-type, height, walking rhythm...
You aren't wrong, but I still see two distinct benefits assuming there is an IR reflective or absorbent coating that can interfere with facial recognition.
Realistically will either of the above matter? Probably not. For it to be effective a large portion of the population would need to care about their privacy, or even their principles above convenience, which they usually don't. However, I can't control what other people do, only what I do. So in this kind of situation I do my best to be a good example of the behavior I would like to see from others and do my best to not contribute to the Prisoner's Dilemma or Tragedy of the Commons.
It's not much, arguably it's basically nothing, but it's what I have.
I would also distinguish between investigations and drag nets. If they're specifically looking into you and your business, then glasses won't help. If they just want to identify 90% of people at a pretes pretest, these may be useful.
Great addition. That was what was kinda in my head, but I didn't state it explicitly.
Some of those mean the more people that use anti facial recognition tools, the more effective they will be for everyone. So we should probably just encourage everyone to use it.
They can easily make a list of people prone to use anti-facial recognition that lives in or walks by certain areas then recognize them by body-type, height, walking rhythm…
Which is why everyone should put stones in their shoes, especially if going to a protest. 🙂
I'd strongly advise against doing this every day. I developed osteoarthritis in my 20s just from my feet being slightly misaligned. Walking wonky can very easily permanently wreck your joints.
Are you going to protests every day?
They just said especially for protests, implying you'd best do it more often than that. Didn't want anyone to take them too literally.
Yeah, It's one tool in the toolbox. and it won't stop all those other things for sure, but products like this can help build awareness of the ubiquitous surveillance we live under. Awareness might eventually lead to policy change. So it's not a bad thing, and the article does describe the limitations and weaknesses.
Also, not for nothing, I saw a test on YouTube (Dr. John Padfield - Business Reform) where his tests showed that IR reflective hats worked better than glasses.
Best thing is to destroy all the cameras near your house.
Yeah, you might as well turn off your antivirus and firewall seeing as those can be bypassed by a skilled actor anyways.
Here's an actual link to the tech: Zenni ID Guard
Pretty wild getting hit with a message to accept all cookies.
Huh. I didn't get a notice to accept cookies. The only thing I have enabled in their stack is:
"All-in-one defense across the light spectrum —reflects near-infrared light, filters blue light, blocks 100% UV rays, and is light-adaptive for all-day comfort."
Apart from defending against facial recognition, this is really dope.
Please dont link to paywalled articles, unless you paste the whole article contents in the post
Providing the text or an archive link separately may be polite, but your request goes too far. If somebody shares a paywalled link that is on topic for the community, you have several options. You can ignore it and miss out, and be no worse off. You can find an archive copy yourself, and even share it in a comment to receive fake internet points. You can enjoy the discussion in the comments and maybe find other relevant links there. But you’re suggesting that the community is better off with fewer posts and less participation (“please don’t [post] unless”).
The community rules include
Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
That’s a much nicer way of stating a preference to have OPs do the legwork. Please don’t discourage community participation.
To be fair, the sidebar itself suggests copying the content over if they're paywalled. It's nuts that you've highlighted that, and then complained about a rephrasing of what it says.
It’s nuts to me that you can’t see the nuance in the difference between “please don’t [post]” and “maybe copy [the article text] into the post”.
The “maybe” in there is doing a lot of work converting that into a suggested guideline rather than being a hard rule, and a polite request to follow the guideline is appropriate. But the nuance of “don’t post unless” is distinctly discouraging participation, and not appropriate.
Low effort posts harm our communities. Please don't encourage harmful participation
So, how are these different that wearing a pair of very dark, wrap around sunglasses?
Those don't block infrared. They're basically transparent to it.
I’ve been thinking for a little while that it might be interesting to build on a pair of glasses with a couple IR LEDs at either edge and a battery pack to light them up. I can’t decide if that would be good to wear to a protest because the glare would likely obscure your entire face to cameras, or if it would be a bad idea because you’d stick out immediately on any surveillance.
That would probably be more effective as a form of protest against such technologies.
DIY hoodie https://www.popsci.com/technology/camera-shy-hoodie-privacy/
These glasses are pricey tho, so maybe DIY based on the hoodie https://www.reflectacles.com/#home
That’s awesome, thanks for sharing!
There's another site that sells actual privacy sunglasses (full IR blocking + reflective frames) but they've been sold out for months.
Reflectacles?
I've had two pairs of these I bought years ago but unfortunately lost one pair. Chatted with the guy when I bought them and he seemed like a sound guy. I hope being sold out means his business is doing well!
Only issue I have with them is they aren't really wide enough and I have a small head. Not that they fit badly, they aren't too tight but the design looks too small on my face that it looks a bit comedic tbh.
They are also really nice to drive in at night as they stop you from being blinded by the absurdity that is modern headlights.
Version alpha
So, these actually work great when IR is used (for example you won't be able to unlock your iPhone when wearing them), however my question is, does this help at all when just a normal photo is taken? You can wear these, have a 'normal' photo taken and it just looks like you're wearing standard glasses. That could then be fed through CV, etc?
I can unlock my phone while wearing them.
[edit]
-I don't rely on biometrics, though.
Article says no.
I like the idea, but don't just buy these assuming you're good to go, and then walk around with a normie iPhone or Android device that phones home constantly with your precise location and device ID, SIM information etc.
There is always at least some error rate and deniability in probabilistic matching by something like facial recognition. There is a lot less deniability of your specific device ID, tied to your real identity (thanks to KYC laws), being in X location at Y time.
I actually recently bought a pair of Zennis and saw this advertising before it made the rounds in the media. The advertising was extremely generic in describing how it worked.
So this is it? Just IR blocking? Like, your eyes are not your whole face. Put a pair of sunglasses on and achieve the same thing...
Videos testing these glasses show that face-id doesn't work when wearing them. This demonstrates that (at least for Apple), covering your eye area is enough to defeat IR-based facial recognition.
It kind of has a red tinted layer which creates red blobs in quite a lot of different lighting conditions. Even with non IR photography, if you are standing outside or under bright lights there's a good chance any pictures will end up with red artifacts in the lenses, partially or completely obscuring your eyes.
Oh, I tend to grab Zenni glasses every couple of years and saw that option. I opted against since I didn't think they were much more than a gimmick, but also at time (and probably still is) they were not compatible with the kind that auto tint in the sun.
I'm also pretty sure if I do get tracked, they have my phone and my unique appearance. I'm not sure someone of my height and build is going to be able to Luigi someone.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)