from the surveillance-society dept

Recent reports have raised alarm about the use of PatronScan, an ID-checking and face-scanning system, at multiple LGBTQ+ bars in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood. Much of the attention has focused on reports that the system photographs patrons as they enter venues and questions about whether those images are used for facial recognition.

A broader privacy concern also deserves scrutiny. For years, PatronScan has marketed itself not just as an ID-verification tool, but as a system that allows bars and clubs to identify patrons, keep records about them, and share information across venues. As one news article published in 2019 documented, PatronScan built a network that allowed participating bars to flag patrons and share information about them with other establishments. 

And in California, it’s not at all clear how PatronScan’s business model of scanning IDs and sharing the information from those scans with other bars comports with the law. California’s ID privacy law, which was amended in 2018 to add ID “scans,” states that no businesses shall “retain or use” any information from a scanned ID card except for limited purposes such as to verify age, comply with a legal requirement, or prevent fraud. 

Californians should be deeply concerned about businesses that collect information from government-issued IDs and use it to build databases about where people go, whom they associate with, and whether they should be allowed into other public gathering places. That concern is especially strong in LGBTQ+ spaces, which have long served as refuges for people to go without being tracked, monitored, or put on lists. 

We reached out to Patronscan with questions regarding their practices and their views on California ID law. They referred us to their published FAQ question “Is Patronscan privacy compliant in California?” which claims that the use of Patronscan kiosks is legal in California. They also said “Patronscan does not do facial recognition in North America, or any kind of automated analysis of the ID or the live photo image.” 

The California Legislature Has Investigated PatronScan’s Business Model 

In 2018, the California Legislature published bill analyses (on that year’s AB 2769) that went into detail about PatronScan’s business. Reviewing PatronScan’s own materials, the California Senate Judiciary Committee found that the company had collected and retained information on 561,087 customers in Sacramento alone during the first five months of 2018—a remarkable figure for a city whose population had only recently topped 500,000.

Lawmakers also found that at that time, PatronScan retained information for at least 90 days or longer in some cases, shared information among participating bars, and maintained bans that lasted an average of more than 19 years. A PatronScan “Public Safety Report” used 10,000 scans collected on a single day to report on “where customers live, how far they have traveled, and how many different venues the customers patronized.” 

This was not simply checking IDs at the door. PatronScan was building a database. 

An immigrants’ rights group, the Coalition for Human Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), wrote about its concern at the time with these growing ID databases, saying that “placing individuals on a database that labels them a “threat to public safety” has “significant immigration consequences that could lead to deportation, revoking of current status, or denial of future immigration relief.” 

Today, PatronScan states that it retains personal information about all customers for 21 days, and about flagged customers for up to five years. This includes the customer’s name, date of birth, photograph, gender, and zip code. It also includes the dates and times that the customer entered particular bars. Such databases are a grave privacy threat. Personal data is routinely stolen by thieves, misused by a company’s employees, seized by government agencies, and diverted to new purposes by a company’s executives. 

California Law Still Bans ID-Scan Databases, And Bars Should Follow That Law

In 2018, California lawmakers closed what they viewed as a loophole. Existing law already prohibited businesses from retaining or using information obtained when they “swiped” a driver’s license, except for the narrow purposes of legal requirements (like a judicial warrant) or “preventing fraud, abuse, or material misrepresentation.” 

After reviewing companies like PatronScan, the Legislature amended the law to make clear that the same restrictions that apply to businesses that “swipe” ID cards also apply when those IDs are “scanned.” PatronScan opposed that change, arguing it wanted to preserve the ability to share information among bars so participating venues could decide whether to admit patrons.

The bill became law anyway. Yet PatronScan continues to market and sell a system that apparently retains information from scanned IDs, and allows participating venues to flag patrons and share information across its network. 

At a minimum, that raises serious questions about how those practices fit with California’s existing ID privacy law. Bar and nightlife venue owners who utilize PatronScan should think twice about its effects on their customers, and consider going back to standard, visual ID checks. These physical checks have been effective at keeping underage patrons out of 21-and-over venues for decades, and don’t present the serious privacy dangers of creating a private database of bar patrons. 

For venues serving vulnerable communities like immigrants or the LGBTQ+ community, the stakes of using this technology are even higher. It’s disappointing and alarming to see some of California’s more well-known LGBTQ+ nightlife spots instead lining up as PatronScan’s early adopters. A venue cannot claim to be a safe space while feeding its patrons’ data to a third party database. These businesses should reject PatronScan, return to the standard ID checks that every other bar has been able to utilize, and prove to their customers that their privacy and security still matters. 

Originally published to the EFF’s Deeplinks blog.

Filed Under: age verification, california, id privacy, id scans, id verification, privacy

Companies: patronscan

I couldn’t believe it. Had Roku really just casually inserted global viral raccoon sensation Jimothy into Roku City? I’d seen a post claiming so, but knowing how easy it is to fake things with AI, I had to see it for myself.

I powered up one of my home’s half-dozen Roku streaming boxes and spent 10 minutes trying to force the platform into screen-saver mode, which then opens up Roku City. Ever since the most recent Roku platform update, I see this interface far less often than I used to.

It’s a complex world out there, and more than ever folks may find themselves in a situation where they want to keep particular bits of information away from prying eyes. At the same time, overly complex methods of file security can make it difficult to share said information with the intended recipients impractical. So what’s the solution?

One proposal from [Ryan Walker] AKA [machinehum] is the Phantomdrive — a fully open source USB flash drive that features a secret secondary filesystem. Not only is the existence of this data hidden from the operating system under normal circumstances, but it’s encrypted with AES-256. Rather than relying on software running on the computer to handle the decryption, the CH569 chip that powers the drive does it internally.

To complete this platform-agnostic approach, [machinehum] had to come up with a way for the user to unlock the secure storage that didn’t require running any code on the client machine. A hardware solution such as a keypad is the obvious answer, but in this case, was out of the question as it would immediately tip off an observer about the drive’s true nature. A covert storage device needs a similarly inconspicuous method of authentication.

That’s why the firmware on the Phantomdrive keeps an eye on all the write operations to the unsecured section of the drive looking for the string password:. Once it sees that, it treats whatever follows as the decryption key. If it’s correct, the previously inaccessible data will appear to the operating system as a new drive.

[machinehum] cautions that none of this has been professionally audited from a security standpoint, and that you should treat this whole concept as an experiment. In other words, it’s probably more than sufficient for the average person, but no guarantees on how long it would last should a three letter agency gets too interested in what you’re up to.

If this seems a bit familiar, it’s because the Phantomdrive follows up [machinehum]’s self-destructing USB flash drive from a few years back. The concept is essentially the same, except this time there’s no Magic Smoke getting released.

The El Capitan Theatre and the Walt Disney Studios lot have long been reserved for some of Disney’s biggest moments. Citizen Kane held its Hollywood premiere on that same stage in 1941, and decades later, The Lion King, the Avengers films, and a steady run of Pixar premieres have rolled out the red carpet at the same historic Hollywood venue.

This September, though, Disney is handing the spotlight to a different kind of storyteller… creators. Created in LA is a new two-day creator summit and film festival conceived by creator Jon Youshaei and presented by Disney. The event will bring 350 creators and storytellers together on September 17–18 for a premiere event at the El Capitan Theatre before moving to the Walt Disney Studios lot for a day of conversations.

The Triangle AIO Twin was already one of the better dressed wireless speaker systems under $1,000, but apparently French audio companies consider standing still a form of surrender.

Triangle has introduced a new Macassar finish for the AIO Twin, wrapping its compact cabinets in a genuine wood veneer inspired by Macassar ebony. The dark brown base is crossed by vertical grain and fine golden highlights that shift in appearance depending on the lighting and viewing angle.

In other words, it should look considerably more expensive than another pair of rectangular black boxes parked beside your turntable.

The new veneer is paired with the AIO Twin’s familiar oblong magnetic grille, now covered in a deep brown fabric supplied by Scandinavian textile specialist Gabriel. The combination gives the system a warmer, more traditional appearance that should work particularly well in Art Deco, mid-century and contemporary interiors.

Related Reading: Triangle AIO Twin Wireless Speakers and Thetis 340 Subwoofer Review

Same Speaker, Better Suit

Triangle has not made any acoustic or connectivity changes for the Macassar edition.

The AIO Twin remains a two-speaker stereo system built around one active loudspeaker containing the amplification and connections. The second passive speaker is powered through the supplied three-meter speaker cable.

Each cabinet uses a 1-inch silk-dome tweeter and 5-inch midrange/bass driver, with 50 watts of Class D amplification available for each channel. Triangle specifies a frequency response of 56Hz to 22kHz and recommends the system for rooms measuring up to approximately 269 square feet.

Wi-Fi streaming supports files up to 24-bit/192kHz, while Bluetooth 5.0 includes aptX, aptX HD, aptX LL, AAC and SBC. AirPlay, Spotify Connect, UPnP/DLNA playback and Triangle AIO multiroom support are also included.

Available streaming services through the Triangle AIO app include Spotify, Qobuz, TIDAL, Deezer, Amazon Music and TuneIn internet radio.

Physical connections include a switchable RCA line-level/MM phono input, 3.5mm auxiliary input, optical digital input, Ethernet, USB-A for storage devices or charging and a mono subwoofer output. The USB connection does not operate as a USB DAC input for a computer.

Why the AIO Twin Still Works

When we reviewed the AIO Twin, its warmer tonal balance, texture, dynamic punch and fatigue-free presentation made it a more appealing long-term listen than Triangle’s less expensive Borea BR03 BT.

The AIO Twin also produced surprisingly convincing bass for its size, although adding a subwoofer remains worthwhile for larger rooms, movies or listeners determined to remind the neighbors that they still own a copy of Madvillainy.

The system’s versatility continues to be its strongest selling point. Buyers can connect a turntable, stream high-resolution music, add a CD player, improve the sound from a television and build a multiroom system without purchasing a separate amplifier or network streamer.

The omissions have not changed either. There is still no HDMI ARC/eARC input, which makes TV integration less seamless than it could be, and the USB-A port cannot be used as a digital connection from a laptop or desktop computer. Optical works perfectly well with a television, but HDMI would make volume and power control easier.

Macassar veneer cannot fix that, although it does make the disappointment look rather elegant.

The Bottom Line

The Macassar edition does not improve the sound, add HDMI or turn the AIO Twin into an entirely new product. It simply gives one of the most versatile wireless stereo systems under $1,000 a more luxurious finish.

For listeners who want real stereo sound, vinyl playback, high-resolution streaming and TV connectivity without filling the room with components and cables, the AIO Twin remains a compelling option. It now also looks considerably less likely to have arrived with the office furniture.

Price & Availability

The Triangle AIO Twin wireless speakers are available for $899/pair at Amazon and Best Buy in English Green, Abyss Blue, Linen Grey, White, Black, Brown Maple, Eggplant, and now Macassar. However, the Macassar finish appears to be out of stock on Triangle’s U.S. website at the time of publication.

Related Reading:

Fans of “Widow’s Bay” in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco can catch a free screening of the series’ final three episodes of the first season at select AMC theaters.

“Widow’s Bay” made its debut in April, quickly becoming an Apple TV hit. The series has been praised for blending genuine horror with character-driven comedy.

Even with its late premiere date, it earned 19 Emmy nominations. That includes the coveted Best Comedy Series.

Now, Apple TV wants to do something for “Widow’s Bay” fans.

According to Deadline, Apple TV has teamed up with Rutgers University, alma mater of “Widow’s Bay” creator Katie Dippold, for free, one-night-only fan screenings of the first season’s final three episodes. The screenings will take place in select AMC theaters on Wednesday, August 12, in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco.

If you’re interested in going, there’s a helpful Apple TV Screenings site that shows which theaters are participating.

Apple TV continues to churn out hits under the direction of Eddy Cue. Cue was recently honored with Cannes Lions’ Entertainment Person of the Year.

The Albany Police Department did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment.

Flock’s Savannah video centers on an interview with then major of police Robert Gavin, who praised how Flock facilitates data-sharing between different law enforcement agencies.

“We spent a lot of time doing community talks about what we’re gonna use them for, what we’re not gonna use them for,” Gavin says, adding that the overall objective is to “keep everybody safe.”

On July 31, Savannah police mayor Van Johnson wrote in a Facebook post that the allegations involving the six employees had been referred to the GBI to determine whether criminal charges should be filed.

The Savannah Police Department did not respond for comment. The GBI confirmed that it investigated the incidents in Savannah and Albany, but didn’t provide information, noting that the Savannah investigation is “still active.”

According to Johnson, the Savannah Police Department conducted an internal investigation through the Flock Safety Audit Assistance Program, which Flock introduced in April. In a press release announcing the tool, Flock said it “continuously monitors system activity and surfaces search patterns that fall outside an agency’s typical usage.” Savannah police chief Lenny Gunther told a local news outlet that the investigation surfaced 127 inappropriate searches out of the 39,000 it conducted this year.

“Public trust is non-negotiable,” Johnson said in his Facebook statement. “These tools exist to keep our community safe, not for personal or unauthorized use.”

In 2020, Flock posted a video by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution about the Sandy Springs Police Department’s arrest of a porch pirate. The video did not feature any interviews with Sandy Springs Police Department personnel, but noted that the man was arrested after a Flock camera captured the license plate of the suspect.

About five years later, the Sandy Springs Police Department launched an internal investigation into whether one of its officers had misused Flock’s technology. According to investigators, the officer allegedly ran ALPR searches to support beta testing for Signal 8, a law enforcement software company that employed the officer in a second job.

This officer, the police department claimed, did not cooperate with its investigation and was subsequently terminated.

Meanwhile, Flock showcased the Baytown Police Department in 2025 as part of a brief series highlighting cases where police said Flock was instrumental in apprehending a suspect.

“We use it multiple times every day, and once I log in to my computer, Flock is the first thing I click on,” a Baytown police officer says.

On July 30, Baytown police chief John Stringer announced the resignation of a police officer who had been under investigation for allegedly misusing Flock’s technology. The Baytown Police Department did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment.

In his video statement, Stringer said that two investigations into the officer’s alleged misuse—one internal, one criminal—remained ongoing.

“Accountability to the fullest extent of the law will be pursued,” Stringer added.

When a patient is seeking treatment, Logue says, she does not use their appearance to express concern or as a motivator, because there are always other contributing factors. With a public figure, Logue says, we don’t have real insights into these factors. Instead, most people focus on what their body looks like.

Although a lot of commenters say they’re less worried about Grande individually and more concerned about the impact she may have on her young fans, Logue says focusing our efforts on celebrities’ appearances also doesn’t meaningfully combat aspirational thinness in our day-to-day lives, either.

“Talking about how you look fat, engaging in fatphobia, it’s all these things that are so normalized. And when I work with clients, that is the dangerous stuff,” she says. “I’ve never had a client sit down and say, ‘I got an eating disorder because I heard Demi Lovato had an eating disorder.’”

One big sign that the viral posts about celebrities aren’t helping people with eating disorders is that almost none of them share resources, such as links to groups like the National Eating Disorder Association. And many of the posts contain an undeniable strain of snark, cruelty, and carelessness. There are viral compilations of celebrity women with captions like “it’s not just Ariana,” most of which exclude celebrity men entirely. Some people have used AI tools to edit images of these women to make them appear obese and used them as memes, while others have analyzed every part of their bodies in photos to declare them too skinny.

Women in various stages of eating disorder recovery are actively grappling with the issue. Natália Franz, a Slovak actress, commented on one video about celebrities and eating disorders to say, “I wish more people were worried about me when I was not eating rather than normalizing it.”

Franz tells WIRED that she’s concerned about the influence celebrities have over their fans, and she’s hoping that the discourse can change the culture for her own daughter. She also says that her body image issues started at home and that parents need to be careful with how they talk about food and appearance around their kids.

“I actually think it’s weird this heated discussion is only about one celebrity,” Franz says. “But when you see so many celebrities getting this thin, it’s very obvious patriarchy is on the rise.”

Having a personal history with eating disorders can provide a more informed perspective, as evidenced by some of the more nuanced conversations happening online. But the reality is that eating disorders are complicated, multifaceted, and different from person to person. Outsiders cannot infer what is going on privately in any celebrity’s life based on the limited information they share with the public, but that doesn’t stop people from labeling those in their inner circle “enablers” or assuming that a break from the public eye means they’re seeking treatment for an eating disorder.

“Talking about this in a heightened, gossipy, fearmongering kind of way is not necessarily going to inspire people to get help,” says Keesha Amezcua, chief clinical officer at Alsana Eating Disorder Treatment Center. “A lot of people on social media platforms are not informed, they’re not educated, and they don’t know what they’re witnessing and participating in is incredibly unhealthy and harmful.”

The National Alliance for Eating Disorders helpline provides resources about treatment options at 1-866-662-1235, or you can text “ALLIANCE” to 741741 if you are experiencing a crisis. More information can be found on the National Eating Disorder Association’s website.