"Individuals who only have a loan relationship, credit card or safe deposit box are considered non-depositors and will be required to provide a thumbprint when cashing checks." Geez, even if you only have a loan.....

links to read:

http://www.scafo.org/library/140305.html
http://www.scafo.org/library/160602.html
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/1999/03/07/fin_thumbprints_help.html

Banks have been doing this for a few years. You can look at it as an invasion of privacy, or you can look at it as a method to prevent check fraud. With the number of check washing and otehr check fraud schemes out there today the banks had to find a way to protect their customers. IDs can be faked, thumbprints cannot. Since you aren't as customer of theirs, they probably could care less about how you feel about it, they are just trying to protect their customers.

The best answer is maybe. If it was with visible ink (black, etc.) yes it will be part of the image. The scanned resolutioin may or may not be sufficient to capture the detail. If it was with a clear substance it would depend on the way it reflected the scanner light. Many college transcripts will show COPY in large print if copied but it is invisible or nearly so, depending on light angle, to the eye.

This is the first I've heard of it, but I know and like that I live in the sticks. I'm afriad that if my bank did that, some of the rednecks might fetch a rope. Although, I have the advantage of being known by almost all the senior tellers at all the branches....

I guess my question is how does this help the bank? They have nothing to compare it to, so they can't tell if a check is stolen. I recall we have a few bankers here, and I'd love to hear thier explination. Becuase if they can't impress me, it sounds like stupidity on par with the TSA.

Several years ago I tried to cash a check at a local bank drive thru. Since I didn't have an account there they said I needed to come inside the bank for fingerprinting. I just drove away and cashed it at my own bank.

I like being able to cash a check at the bank it is drawn on to eliminate any surprise of the check bouncing later, but I'm just not too keen on handing out my fingerprints, eye scans, DNA specimens or stool samples to just anybody.

The big shocker is the requirement to have your fingerprints digitally scanned to get into Disney World in Florida. I was floored. If my family wasn't there with me, I'd have just walked away. I asked the folks at the gate why they were requiring finger print scans. They claimed that is was to protect me if my ticket was ever lost. I assumed if I lost a ticket they would have me re-scanned to verify my identity, then issue at ticket. So let's test the system. I proceeded to loose my ticket. I went to the guest services and a new ticket was re-issued without the scan. Something fishy with this Disney scanning.

This Disney scan really got me thinking (conspiracy mode on)... With some of the recent allegations that telephone records from the top communications providers were given to the USG for surfing, I have to wonder if Disney is helping the gov surf for felons or other goblins that might visit their parks? Just wondering.

TR

"Sir, target #005 has a hit on a gas station in Kissimmee, FL, his last hit was in Ft. Lauderdale. Based upon the stop, and prior information gathered from his credit card transactions is that he is enroute to a theme park. Oh, sir, just got a hit, he just came in on turnstile 3A, north side, main entrance to epcot. Would you like to access the security cameras?"

"Nah, that's okay. He was only doing 3 mph over the speed limit, we'll get him when he gets back into town. Let me know when he does"

Taking thumbprints has been around for quite some time, at least by the big banks. Many check forgers/kiters already have criminal records, so if a check bounces, they can turn the thumbprint over to law enforcement and they can check the print against the criminal databases. The print plus security camera footage would give a pretty solid prosecution case, once the person is arrested. The police probably will not actually send someone out after them unless the check amount was substantial, but an arrest warrant will be in the system for the next time they cross paths with the police, such as during a traffic stop or if they are arrested for some other reason.

I could also see some banks, especially the big ones, that use digital scanning having their own internal database of known check fraudsters that will immediately raise the red flag to the teller at the time the check is being cashed. Biometric software makes that process very quick.

Most banks started by using blank ink, but I believe most banks either scan your thumbprint digitally or use an "invisible" ink these days to lessen the inconvenience to customers and the perception that "I'm being fingerprinted like a criminal."

The theme parks are huge money-makers for Disney, and since admission is expensive, there is a lot of incentive for people to try and game the system. More than protecting you, the fingerprinting is to benefit Disney's bottom line.

For one-time tickets, I think the fingerprint is mostly just an analytic tool rather than to catch cheaters since the potential damage to Disney is limited. For these tickets, gathering biometric data allows Disney's analysts to count how many unique customers have visited in a given time period, like some holiday weekend, how many visitors are repeat visitors, exactly when do they come back, etc. Believe me, that kind of info is gold to Disney and its managers.

However, for season passes, which are expensive and can be used unlimited times, Disney tries to discourage "sharing" of passes as much as possible. In that case, your fingerprint (or probably more likely, the biometric hash value) must match the fingerprint originally used with the pass the first time or you won't get in. They may even take away the pass right there for violating the purchase agreement. But I'm sure they'd be happy to let you in once you walked over to the ticket booth and forked over the cash for a new ticket. They are a business after all and are only after your money. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Fingerprints can be faked. While I'm not sure that's happening at themeparks, I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility for check fraud gangs who likely also change their appearance before going into a bank. I suppose the banks prevent a bit of the low-level fraud from Meth-heads who steal checks out of rural mail boxes and wash them. But that doesn't discount that you have now been permanently fingerprinted. It's recorded, your ID and other information will be taken down with it (and your financial transaction will make it's way to foggy bottom I'm sure). Valid ID's have been used for years, so the serious security flaw is in how the banking system handles checks in the first place. I don't think this breach of privacy is the right solution - it was just the most expedient and cheap one for them.

And that record never goes away. Nor have you signed any document or contract with said bank stating that any loss of that information has consequences or provision to any 3rd Party is in your control... no no, that's THEIR information now. And in a world where monthly I hear of massive data loss with social security/name/account numbers, this doesn't sit well with me. If Citibank can lose their stuff or have it "go missing", do you think the local bank will do much better?

Disney might have other things in mind... I'm thinking child molesters and kidnappers are targeted in addition to amassing a vast set of data on their consumers. Again, what happens to that fingerprint is undeniably out of your control - and it appears that they were more than willing to say it was for one reason and then not follow through... this is the company that says you should trust them to take a permanent digital imprint of your biometric data.

And my buddy loves to say "but if you aren't doing anything wrong...." Well, I wasn't doing anything wrong, and I didn't plan to, but I'm not going to blindly give up my life's history to a corporation which can use it for anything it sees fit. I'm sure that even if you did sign something saying they would keep it private, that the moment they broke that agreement or some federal agency went data mining, congress would roll over and make it legal. <img src="/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Actually, I checked and Disney is using two-finger geometry scanners, not fingerprint scanners, so they can't identify who is actually entering the parks. They don't care who is getting into the park, only that they're not sharing their passes. I'm sure that the two-finger geometry method they are using isn't all that reliable, but good enough to distinguish two different people trying to use the same pass on the same day or in the same season. And keeping the matching threshold loose enough not to generate too many false mismatches and anger legitimate park visitors.

Now that I know that they're using finger geometry, I doubt that Disney is using the biometric hashes for analytic purposes. When looking at millions of admissions per year, there's probably too much noise and sloppiness in the two-finger geometry data to be of much analytic use. It's just to deter the pass cheaters.

If Disney actually started checking who is attending its parks, that would open them up for all kinds of lawsuits from all sides--from innocent people who feel violated, from people with past criminal histories who feel harrassed, from crime victims inside the park who claim Disney should have stopped these criminals from getting in, etc. And tons of negative PR from civil libertarians and such. No, that's a huge headache that they would rather avoid.