The NFL is implementing facial authentication across all stadiums (updated)

[Skye Jacobs]

Correction (Aug 5): The new NFL credentialing system does not affect fans entering stadiums, in other words, fans are not a part of the program, they will have their tickets scanned as normal.

The new face authentication will become operational for the 2024 season for individuals with working credentials – team/gameday personnel, vendors, and media. These people have already submitted their photo (facial authentication, not facial recognition) as part of the process and this system will make it more efficient and secure. The goal is to secure entry for thousands of credentialed media, officials, staff, so they can easily access restricted areas such as press boxes and locker rooms

The original story follows below:

The NFL is rolling out facial authentication technology in its stadiums starting on August 8. The system recognizes players and employees so that only properly credentialed individuals can access the locker rooms and the press box. The NFL is rolling out Wicket's facial authentication technology across all 32 stadiums for the upcoming season following a successful trial conducted at various venues last year, including Cleveland Browns Stadium.

The primary goal of the system is to facilitate access for credentialed media, officials, staff, and guests to restricted areas such as the playing field, press box, and locker rooms. By using facial recognition, the NFL also aims to prevent the fraudulent use of counterfeit physical credentials. The Wicket system employs advanced facial recognition software but is very fast and easy to use.

Those with working credentials must first link their ticketing account to their facial image using a selfie. Wicket's artificial intelligence creates a unique digital code that represents the user's facial features instead of storing the actual image.

Upon arriving at the stadium, registered users can access designated lanes equipped with camera-enabled devices, such as tablet computers. As users look into the camera, the system compares their faces to the stored digital code associated with their account.

The process takes an average of just two seconds per ticket. Wicket claims its technology can authenticate faces with 99.7% accuracy, even in low-light conditions. Additionally, the system allows friends and family members using tickets from the same account to quickly follow the primary ticket holder through the gate, enhancing the overall entry experience.

The Wicket FR system is opt-in, allowing users to choose between facial authentication and traditional entry methods. So those uninclined to hand over their biometrics need not worry.

Several teams, including the Cleveland Browns and Atlanta Falcons, have already begun using this technology for ticket holder entry. The Browns report that 35,000 fans have enrolled in the "Express Access" facial authentication program, which also verifies ages for alcohol purchases at concession stands.

However, details regarding the internal setup of the Wicket system at stadiums remain unclear. Early versions used Apple iPads for face scans, but there is potential for integration with other entry hardware.

The adoption of facial recognition technology is also gaining traction in other sports. The New York Mets have already implemented the Wicket system at Citi Field. Soccer leagues worldwide are installing similar systems, but not necessarily Wicket's. Currently, 25 of the top 100 soccer stadiums utilize facial recognition for fan surveillance, indicating a broader trend in the sports industry toward enhanced security measures.

Image credit: James Marvin Phelps

Permalink to story:

The NFL is implementing facial authentication across all stadiums (updated)

 

[Neatfeatguy]

Um, no thanks.

I wonder if other companies will try to make use of these things at the stadiums. Concerts are set at stadiums, along with other attractions.

 

[RudyBob]

Needed at the voting booth

 

[ScottSoapbox]

Needed at the voting booth

So much for a secret ballot.

(And votes would still be vulnerable between the booth and multiple machine final total system.)

 

[p51d007]

Watch people embrace this because "it is convenient", and faster. It's called CONDITIONING.
Once people accept that, they will start putting it in baseball games, NASCAR, and on and on.
All the while, corporation, advertisers & GOVERNMENT is keeping the data.

 

[imdarkbreeze]

"It takes a ticker holder an average of two seconds to get through the system."

No, ticket, not ticker. Lame.

 

[Endymio]

So much for a secret ballot.

Nonsense. Validating you have a legal right to vote has been part of the US voting system since the nation was founded.

That validation, at times however, has been more theoretical than year. Last year, a lawsuit by a private voters-rights group forced LA County to remove more than 1.5 million people illegally registered to vote. That's just in one county alone.

(And votes would still be vulnerable between the booth and multiple machine final total system.)

By your logic, we shouldn't ask anyone to show ID to buy alcohol, tobacco, or assault rifles -- as those items are still vulnerable afterwards to being transferred to someone else.

 

[JohnRambo4]

Where are they getting your pic to compare it to?

 

[JackMcHue]

How about no?

 

[JackMcHue]

Where are they getting your pic to compare it to?

It says in the article. You submit a selfie to them.

 

[JackMcHue]

Watch people embrace this because "it is convenient", and faster. It's called CONDITIONING.
Once people accept that, they will start putting it in baseball games, NASCAR, and on and on.
All the while, corporation, advertisers & GOVERNMENT is keeping the data.

Exactly. They're starting with something apparently innocuous, but it will quickly move to more necessary and critical things.

 

[JackMcHue]

Needed at the voting booth

No! No, no, no, no, N TO THE O!

 

[dalpilot]

People will sign up for this if there is an "express lane" that allows them quicker entry than regular (say physical ticket only) system. Also, if you haven't looked around lately almost every traffic light has a camera on top of it and you can bet they aren't just looking for red light runners - Faces, license plates, etc. Our privacy is slowly but surely disappearing unless you want to get off the grid with house powered by solar (with battery backup or diesel generator B/U) and double VPN if you want internet. Every other day some major corp has data breach so you need some kind of monitoring service to see if your data has been leaked. Kind of hard to stay off the grid unless you have lots of money and you like living off by your self in wilderness.

 

[scavengerspc]

By your logic, we shouldn't ask anyone to show ID to buy alcohol, tobacco, or assault rifles -- as those items are still vulnerable afterwards to being transferred to someone else.

We all show ID when we register to vote.

 

[Endymio]

We all show ID when we register to vote.

No. In my state, to vote I am asked for my registration card only, which isn't an official id, has no photo on it, and is a simple non-laminated piece of paper which can be printed on a home computer in a few seconds. Some states ask for less than that.

As for registering to vote, most states allow that by mail. Some states allow "same day" registration when you vote, without official government ID. Nor is there any firm connection between the person who registers and the person who actually votes, especially when mail-in ballots are in the mix. And no state I know of requires any form of ID when renewing a voter registration. Some states even auto-renew registrations effectively forever, even if the person has moved, died, or was never eligible in the first place ... which explains the LA County fiasco I described above.

And finally, no state actually verifies you have the legal right to vote via citizenship, either at time of registration nor when actually voting.

"In 2006, no state required any ID to vote ... As of 2021, 36 states have enacted some form of voter ID requirement.[2][4] Lawsuits have been filed against many of the voter ID requirements on the basis that they are discriminatory with an intent to reduce voting...."

Voter identification laws in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[scavengerspc]

No. In my state, to vote I am asked for my registration card only, which isn't an official id, has no photo on it, and is a simple non-laminated piece of paper which can be printed on a home computer in a few seconds. Some states ask for less than that.

And THAT is the rules for registration. I did it when I moved to Arkansas.
I provided my ID, and it was done.
This actually prompted my curiosity though, and my profession has had me all over the country for decades, so I'm going to contact some folks I have come to know and get the scoop on this.
See what the truth is in other states. If curious please stay tuned.

 

[scavengerspc]

In my state, to vote I am asked for my registration card only, which isn't an official id

Well in truth, already I have found that it IS an official ID. For voting.
In fact, it says to present that when you vote. Mine does, though I really never noticed it before, probably because it's so obvious.
The right wing talking points about voting are falling apart fast, and honestly, I would encourage everyone to do the same type of research I'm doing.
I didn't fully realize just how full of bullshit the right is on this.
Just authenticating mail-in ballots is an exhausting task, and I never realized just what went into it until now.
I also learned that the right as a whole is firmly against picture voter ID cards.
I did a quick YouTube search and found huge numbers of right wing personalities that insist on photo Ids for voting, but are somehow against photo voter ID cards.
The reason is obvious, it takes away a right wing talking point.
Similar in fact to when they refused to accept the immigration bill THEY insisted on, until they got it. Couldn't lose the talking point.

Everyone should do the research I am doing to learn just how full of **** the right is on this.
I can't wait until the next person tries to justify why photo ID should be required at the polls.

PS. I will not just ignore anyone, but I am honestly curious to see what anyone that comments has to say about this first, so I am just going to kick back for a while and see what comes up.

 

[Endymio]

I did a quick YouTube search and found huge numbers of right wing personalities that insist on photo Ids for voting, but are somehow against photo voter ID cards.

Name just one prominent GOP politician who is against photo voter IDs. Just one.

From ABC News: "Donald Trump made it clear this week that he thinks voters should have to show identification before casting their ballots ... “The time has come for voter ID like everything else,” Trump said at a rally in Tampa on Tuesday. [Only] seven require a photo ID to vote ...."

Every statement I made above is correct. If anything, I'm understating the problem with mail-in ballots. From Realclearpolitics:

"Between 2012 and 2018, 28.3 million mail-in ballots remain unaccounted for, according to data from the federal Election Assistance Commission. The missing ballots amount to nearly one in five of all absentee ballots....

States and local authorities simply have no idea what happened to these ballots since they were mailed – and the figure of 28 million missing ballots is likely even higher because some areas, notably Chicago, did not respond to the federal agency’s survey questions. This figure does not include ballots that were spoiled, undeliverable, or came back for any reason.

Although there is no evidence that the millions of missing ballots were used fraudulently, the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which compiled the public data provided from the Election Assistance Commission, says that the sheer volume of them raises serious doubts about election security...."

In my own personal case, despite the fact that I moved out of state nearly 10 years ago, I still received mail-in ballots at my old address in 2020 and 2022 -- and this despite my officially canceling my registration when I moved.

 

[Endymio]

I can't wait until the next person tries to justify why photo ID should be required at the polls.

By the same logic, I can't wait till someone tries to justify why a photo ID should be required to buy alcohol, narcotic drugs, or firearms. The mail is secure, right, so why not mail-in purchase orders for AR-15s?

 

[scavengerspc]

From ABC News: "Donald Trump made it clear this week that he thinks voters should have to show identification before casting their ballots ... “The time has come for voter ID like everything else,” Trump said at a rally in Tampa on Tuesday. [Only] seven require a photo ID to vote ...."

Every statement I made above is correct. If anything, I'm understating the problem with mail-in ballots. From Realclearpolitics:

"Between 2012 and 2018, 28.3 million mail-in ballots remain unaccounted for, according to data from the federal Election Assistance Commission. The missing ballots amount to nearly one in five of all absentee ballots....

States and local authorities simply have no idea what happened to these ballots since they were mailed – and the figure of 28 million missing ballots is likely even higher because some areas, notably Chicago, did not respond to the federal agency’s survey questions. This figure does not include ballots that were spoiled, undeliverable, or came back for any reason.

Although there is no evidence that the millions of missing ballots were used fraudulently, the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which compiled the public data provided from the Election Assistance Commission, says that the sheer volume of them raises serious doubts about election security...."

In my own personal case, despite the fact that I moved out of state nearly 10 years ago, I still received mail-in ballots at my old address in 2020 and 2022 -- and this despite my officially canceling my registration when I moved.

I don't doubt for a second Repubies are for showing picture ID.
That's not what I said. But you get that a lot, from a lot of people.

And I'm quite sure receiving the ballots is one thing. But go ahead, try to cast them.

Although there is no evidence that the millions of missing ballots were used fraudulently, the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which compiled the public data provided from the Election Assistance Commission, says that the sheer volume of them raises serious doubts about election security...."

It's crazy you discard so easily that "although there is no evidence that the millions of missing ballots were used fraudulently" but you grab on and hold to all the speculation.
Then again, no surprise.

By the same logic, I can't wait till someone tries to justify why a photo ID should be required to buy alcohol, narcotic drugs, or firearms. The mail is secure, right, so why not mail-in purchase orders for AR-15s?

Wow, ok, see that's where you are completely wrong. That reply had no logic.
Well, at least not until casting a vote can kill someone.

 

[Endymio]

I don't doubt for a second Repubies are for showing picture ID.
That's not what I said.

You made this false statement: "I also learned that the right as a whole is firmly against picture voter ID cards. I did a quick YouTube search and found huge numbers of right wing personalities that insist on photo Ids for voting, but are somehow against photo voter ID cards." Retract the lie and we can move on.

It's crazy you discard so easily that "although there is no evidence that the millions of missing ballots were used fraudulently"

It's not millions. It's tens of millions in 2020, and as many again in 2022: one in five of all mail-in ballots cast.

And there are several major problems with your "no proof of fraud" claim. The largest is simply this: a 20% error rate in elections won by razor-thin margins is a serious problem, "fraud" or not. The second is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially when states perform little to no actual verification of mail-in ballots. It's like a bank manager claiming: "well the vault and front door were open all weekend, and our books are so bad we have no idea how much money we should have -- but there's no evidence anything was stolen, so everything's OK."

Our voting system is a mess. 1.5 million people illegally registered to vote in one county alone. How many actually voted? No one knows, not even the county itself. In Georgia, an audit of one county alone found 4200 ballots scanned twice, a second county found 2400 ballots never scanned, etc, etc. The manual recount -- which didn't validate any of the ballots but simple ensured they were accurately counted -- resulted in nearly every single county in the state changing its results. An actual full audit validating the ballots for accuracy, locating lost ballots never counted, etc, would have found far more ... but no such process exists. And the audit also caught actual fraud in that state: 1,001 people who voted twice --- but only caught because they were dumb enough to use their own name both times. Anyone who used a different name, or voted again in a second state, would have never been caught.

My bank hasn't made an error in my account by so many as one single penny in more than forty years. Yet any and all attempts to bring a little more accuracy to our election system are met with stiff resistance from the Left. Why?