Mickey Mouse is watching you: Disneyland deploys facial recognition(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Mickey Mouse is watching you: Disneyland deploys facial recognition
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/28/disneyland-entrance-facial-recognition
50 comments
Ugh! How much fraud occurs at Disneyland? I would be shocked if there isn't a third reason they are not making clear. We desperately need to put up a fight early on with this technology as it's unreliable and just not needed, and it will only cause negatives long term. For anyone who says but it won't be an issue for many; well that's the exact status quo we have now, so it's really only to get worse overall.
I'm positive there are thousands of people banned from Disney parks for good reason - how else can Disney enforce those bans at their scale (150 million visitors per year)?
I'm finding it hard to be empathetic towards an ultra large business with that many customers trying to enforce bans. Also, I find it difficult to support the bans. (Given the number of customers they have, they're probably overly lenient on banning)
People have been banned from disney for stealing in the park, fighting in the park, molesting or assaulting employees in the park. It's better for everyone to keep those people out
How did they do it the rest of the time before inaccurate facial recognition came into fruition?
Probably by only looking out for the worst of the worst and letting other people slip by
[deleted]
Annual pass sharing is widespread in the immigrant community my family is a part of. I’ve half jokingly advised them to pull the race card if they ever get caught. “How dare you imply we all look the same?”
I would guess that it’s very much a pass-sharing thing—I’ve noticed that the level of security around passes has increased a great deal over the past 30ish years. In 2000, a Disneyworld Pass had no expiration date and was simply labeled by gender. In 2023, the same pass was date limited and had a photograph of the passholder digitally associated with it.
My local zoo has a name on the annual pass and requires an ID with the pass to enter. Seems robust enough?
That’s robust but slow. Facial recognition doesn’t add any delay.
I don’t know about Disneyland but Disney World stops people to search their bags and stuff as it is. I can’t imagine an ID check is the real bottleneck at the gates.
And if it was you would think just make ticketing an option… either digital to prevent ticket sharing or ID check at the service kiosks that are already outside the gates, every time. Doesn’t slow the actual gate line at all.
And if it was you would think just make ticketing an option… either digital to prevent ticket sharing or ID check at the service kiosks that are already outside the gates, every time. Doesn’t slow the actual gate line at all.
Is it? Is showing a fake ID to a private individual or company even a crime? I mean, I understand showing it to a police officer is obviously bad, but you can lie all you want about your name online, in person, ... whatever you want right.
I'm Donald Duck, btw.
I'm Donald Duck, btw.
> I'm Donald Duck, btw
You chose the one name that will get you in legal trouble - the IP lawyers will be all over you!
You chose the one name that will get you in legal trouble - the IP lawyers will be all over you!
Considering facial recognition is rather bias with certain ethnicities it will just be inaccurate and fast, so still not solving the issue in full.
It doesn’t need to be solved in full. If the system gives a false negative, someone gets in for free, if it gives a false positive, they get their name on their ID checked.
Both of these are fine failure modes. And the bulk of people walk on through without manual checks slowing it down.
Anti fraud stuff is more about saving more in losses than it costs to implement. Rather than preventing even a single person from slipping through without paying.
Both of these are fine failure modes. And the bulk of people walk on through without manual checks slowing it down.
Anti fraud stuff is more about saving more in losses than it costs to implement. Rather than preventing even a single person from slipping through without paying.
See? It's ALL about convenience.
Corporate america has shown it treats customer information with the highest regard for security and privacy.
Corporate america has shown it treats customer information with the highest regard for security and privacy.
It's a scape goat. I am sure fraud does happen at the park but this now more "won't someone think of the children" but replace children with fraud. Ironic when Disney itself is fraudulent.
It's more than likely they're collecting civilian data for other means and/or for money.
It's more than likely they're collecting civilian data for other means and/or for money.
If it only happens 1% of the time that’s SO much money.
50,000 guests per day, let’s say average person is spending $200 in a day…if 1% of them are doing some kind of entrance fraud you’re looking at $36.5 million dollars per year.
50,000 guests per day, let’s say average person is spending $200 in a day…if 1% of them are doing some kind of entrance fraud you’re looking at $36.5 million dollars per year.
You can make this claim for any larger number by asserting a base rate of 1% without evidence.
Change the number how you want, even 0.1% is still millions of dollars. I'm not claiming the real number is 1% and I thought that should have been obvious.
At 0.1% (which still seems high) you lose out on the entrance fee but still get paid for food, drinks, memorabilia etc. Compare that to the cost for the system and the negative publicity and I'm not sure it's worth it (unless they have another motive they don't want to admit)
You’re allowed to bring in snacks to Disney parks. Pretty much any food that doesn’t need refrigeration is okay to bring. Water is free. You can absolutely ride rides and spend nothing and consume the lines of paying customers.
I imagine if you’re willing to try to get in for free or share your pass among multiple people against park rules you’re the kind of person motivated to avoid spending money.
Also, someone who makes the company money and is breaking rules is still not worth keeping as a customer. If someone spends $1000 at the Mickey Mouse gift they don’t get a pass to break other rules of the grounds just because they were profitable.
I imagine if you’re willing to try to get in for free or share your pass among multiple people against park rules you’re the kind of person motivated to avoid spending money.
Also, someone who makes the company money and is breaking rules is still not worth keeping as a customer. If someone spends $1000 at the Mickey Mouse gift they don’t get a pass to break other rules of the grounds just because they were profitable.
It would cost more than that to install an entire facial recognition network.
i’m sure they’re gonna be selling the data of exactly which shops and rides you went to and for how long
Next: Netflix deploys facial recognition, to prevent account sharing fraud.
This seems reasonable. They seem to be implementing this technology with hashes [1] and they are deleting the data within 30 days.
Some more things to consider:
- Walt Disney World has already been using fingerprints to verify access card and person match so you don’t share entrance passes for many years.
- You are already on private property in a setting with no expectation of privacy.
- Disney has been recording guests on security cameras since before the digital era. Your ride vehicle is always in sight of active video surveillance for ride safety purposes. You have been tracked in various ways inside the property for years and that’s not that crazy, again, considering you’re on private property.
- Universal Studios also uses entry photography likely for the exact same purpose
This is all not to say that these things being normalized doesn’t make them right but, still, I think it’s very not new stuff here. This in my opinion seems like the exact kind of environment where this kind of thing is reasonable.
They’ve basically been doing all of this already and the only difference now is that it’s used specifically for entrance gate purposes.
[1] from Disney’s statement linked within the article:
> These entrance lanes: (1) use images of your face taken by a camera at the entrance and the image of your face that was saved when you first used the ticket or pass; (2) employ biometric technology to convert those images into unique numerical values; (3) compare the numerical values to find a match; and (4) except in cases where data must be maintained for legal or fraud-prevention purposes, delete all numerical values within 30 days of creation. Participation is optional. Entrance lanes that do not employ facial recognition technology are also available.
Some more things to consider:
- Walt Disney World has already been using fingerprints to verify access card and person match so you don’t share entrance passes for many years.
- You are already on private property in a setting with no expectation of privacy.
- Disney has been recording guests on security cameras since before the digital era. Your ride vehicle is always in sight of active video surveillance for ride safety purposes. You have been tracked in various ways inside the property for years and that’s not that crazy, again, considering you’re on private property.
- Universal Studios also uses entry photography likely for the exact same purpose
This is all not to say that these things being normalized doesn’t make them right but, still, I think it’s very not new stuff here. This in my opinion seems like the exact kind of environment where this kind of thing is reasonable.
They’ve basically been doing all of this already and the only difference now is that it’s used specifically for entrance gate purposes.
[1] from Disney’s statement linked within the article:
> These entrance lanes: (1) use images of your face taken by a camera at the entrance and the image of your face that was saved when you first used the ticket or pass; (2) employ biometric technology to convert those images into unique numerical values; (3) compare the numerical values to find a match; and (4) except in cases where data must be maintained for legal or fraud-prevention purposes, delete all numerical values within 30 days of creation. Participation is optional. Entrance lanes that do not employ facial recognition technology are also available.
"In a setting with no expectation of privacy"
This line of thinking is outdated. That sort of phrase was coined before the advent of data tracking agencies, ad agencies, digital cameras, unlimited video and audio retention.
I understand I cannot expect complete privacy from another individual on the street, although a random person seeing me and being recorded, tracked, analzyed and then targeted via ads and used in AI training is a different sort of privacy violation in my opinion. I don't see why we can't or shouldn't expect companies to not employe privacy raping technology just because we are out in "public".
"This in my opinion seems like the exact kind of environment where this kind of thing is reasonable."
Why? Disneyland first opening in 1955, for 50 years they ran fine without cameras, facial recognition, etc. Are we forgetting not too long ago we lived in a world without all of this and we were perfectly fine? The common cop outs like "crime" and "abuse" will occur if cameras didn't exist are stupid. Crime is significantly higher now, despite 24/7 surveillance and tracking. We are also kidding ourselves if we think they are ONLY using it for protection. All this data is fed straight into 900+ shell companies (many of which are ramps for the feds).
This line of thinking is outdated. That sort of phrase was coined before the advent of data tracking agencies, ad agencies, digital cameras, unlimited video and audio retention.
I understand I cannot expect complete privacy from another individual on the street, although a random person seeing me and being recorded, tracked, analzyed and then targeted via ads and used in AI training is a different sort of privacy violation in my opinion. I don't see why we can't or shouldn't expect companies to not employe privacy raping technology just because we are out in "public".
"This in my opinion seems like the exact kind of environment where this kind of thing is reasonable."
Why? Disneyland first opening in 1955, for 50 years they ran fine without cameras, facial recognition, etc. Are we forgetting not too long ago we lived in a world without all of this and we were perfectly fine? The common cop outs like "crime" and "abuse" will occur if cameras didn't exist are stupid. Crime is significantly higher now, despite 24/7 surveillance and tracking. We are also kidding ourselves if we think they are ONLY using it for protection. All this data is fed straight into 900+ shell companies (many of which are ramps for the feds).
No expectation of privacy does not mean that I don't think privacy laws should protect visitors to that property. It just means that as a wide concept, you are on someone else's property and they're allowed to observe you with the exception of privacy spaces like restrooms.
I will remind us all Disneyland already operates in a state with relatively strong privacy laws and I imagine they are following CCPA.
What I mean by "no expectation of privacy" is that businesses are allowed to monitor their premises and, yeah, they're allowed to observe their customers and make business decisions based on those observations. There's nothing inherently morally or legally wrong with that.
If you come into my bakery I'm allowed to watch you and observe that you like buying more cinnamon rolls than donuts and write down that information. If you don't like that I do that, you have the choice to not visit my property.
> Are we forgetting not too long ago we lived in a world without all of this and we were perfectly fine?
Again this is private property. We're all free to not go there. My private property didn't have a security camera in 1995, but I chose to add one in 2026. It's irrelevant to you why I chose to do that or whether you feel like I was perfectly fine before I added it. It's my property. If you don't like it, stay off of it. If we were talking about the state government putting AI tracking cameras on the streets or peeking into homes I would have a much different stance (e.g., I am very much against Flock's business).
I will remind us all Disneyland already operates in a state with relatively strong privacy laws and I imagine they are following CCPA.
What I mean by "no expectation of privacy" is that businesses are allowed to monitor their premises and, yeah, they're allowed to observe their customers and make business decisions based on those observations. There's nothing inherently morally or legally wrong with that.
If you come into my bakery I'm allowed to watch you and observe that you like buying more cinnamon rolls than donuts and write down that information. If you don't like that I do that, you have the choice to not visit my property.
> Are we forgetting not too long ago we lived in a world without all of this and we were perfectly fine?
Again this is private property. We're all free to not go there. My private property didn't have a security camera in 1995, but I chose to add one in 2026. It's irrelevant to you why I chose to do that or whether you feel like I was perfectly fine before I added it. It's my property. If you don't like it, stay off of it. If we were talking about the state government putting AI tracking cameras on the streets or peeking into homes I would have a much different stance (e.g., I am very much against Flock's business).
Geezus_42(1)
Did everyone forget about the years they were wandering around with MagicBands with both short- and long-range RFID designed for Disney to customize experiences directly down to the personal level?
Do not believe any stated policies on privacy and data retention.
Corporations disregard them at their convenience.
Corporations disregard them at their convenience.
> You are already on private property in a setting with no expectation of privacy.
Ah yes, so let's double, triple and quadruple down on the invasive practices, then. That's sound logic.
Ah yes, so let's double, triple and quadruple down on the invasive practices, then. That's sound logic.
Would it be invasive for you to be required to walk around naked? Because naturism resorts with those rules exist.
These examples, of course, does not bother you because you decide not to go to them if you don't want to go to them.
I am not advocating for a complete lack of privacy laws. Disney isn't allowed to put cameras in bathrooms. Disney is required to comply with CCPA in California. I'm just pointing out that private property owners are allowed to generally do this stuff, and pointing out that Disney seems to have some privacy measures in place (e.g., utilizing hashes, having a short retention window, etc).
These examples, of course, does not bother you because you decide not to go to them if you don't want to go to them.
I am not advocating for a complete lack of privacy laws. Disney isn't allowed to put cameras in bathrooms. Disney is required to comply with CCPA in California. I'm just pointing out that private property owners are allowed to generally do this stuff, and pointing out that Disney seems to have some privacy measures in place (e.g., utilizing hashes, having a short retention window, etc).
What if tickets where given with devices; the device would hold the hash value of the facial recognition and zero data would be stored outside of the device. have open 3rd party reviews of these processes and made public so we keep our world safe but without the bullshit excuse that "privacy has to be given up for security".
[deleted]
It's super creepy how this garbage gets rolled out. The value proposition of going to these parks is "have fun and enjoy this." But if you bought a pass and then you found out you'd have to go through this.. what do you do? The annoyed and condescending employee will grief you into complying.
There are many ways to solve this problem, but this approach is the most friendly to the owners.
This is a hard no for me to consider giving that mouse money.
There are many ways to solve this problem, but this approach is the most friendly to the owners.
This is a hard no for me to consider giving that mouse money.
So they're punishing everyone - even people with regular tickets - for pass fraud / unauthorized sharing.
I think I would be willing to pay extra to opt out of creepy face scanning.
I think I would be willing to pay extra to opt out of creepy face scanning.
It always starts with optional opt-out
There’s a big wall around the park too.
Big casinos have been doing the same thing for a long time. At the end of the day, the casino world and the tightly controlled and manicured Disney theme park world don't seem all that different.