- In my opinion, a corner cam is most useful for deterring break-ins and "the bank", whereas an ATM cam is only useful as a fraud prevention measure. Both advantageous to a bank but in different ways.

- Cameras are already on every bank ATM I've used in recent years. Usually, they are on the other side of a two-way mirror. It's no secret what's behind it, but I'm sure they get a really nice shot of anyone who wants to check their lipstick in it really quick. That being said, I've also seen plenty in the delis around that have a very blatant camera installed directly above the screen.

- When do you foresee this being a real issue? I agree that it would be very difficult to fight, but isn't that the point? If someone manages to spoof your card, your pin, and your face all at the same time that seems like a much different problem (like a hostage...) than simple fraud. I'm having trouble envisioning how such a system could work directly against you in the way that you suggest.

- True. Then again, compression technology is such that even an ATM on a dial-up modem could probably upload a useful snap by the time you could finish a transaction. I do think it's reasonable to expect that if the system were to be implemented that in a few years time all ATMs could be running on decent connections. Even if you count the few real backcountry areas with ATMs, it's a small issue.

- The rest of my comment will address your last point so that it's a little more readable, and because I think it's the most important to address.

First, if you believe this to be the case, then it's already too late. Your face is already in their databases doing perhaps all kinds of more interesting things than depositing your paycheck. This falls back to the issue of if you don't trust anyone, don't depend on anyone which ultimately leads to non-participation being the best bet for avoidance, or over-participation in order to blend in. You should probably worry much more about what the "authorities" are doing with your candid shots on facebook, your friends' facebook, or whatever than the pic snapped of while you withdraw $40 for an evening on the town.

The most obvious line of defense is, like the whole gun database ordeal, to stipulate that no government body may keep a record of this data beyond its expiration date and even then, only by the institution to which it is served unless directed otherwise by a warrant. If you're worried about your bank doing dirty things to your image, you might want to stop banking since they already have a copy of every other relevant bit of identifying data. If you're worried about the police, then you should be worried about the NSA. If you're worried about the NSA, good. Let me know once you've found a nice hiding space, I'll bring some board games. I don't expect we'll have much internet access.

You'd be right if you said that the stipulation would mean nothing to those interested in gathering that information, but the point is really just to prevent them from using that information in any way that's detectable.

When I say self-destruct, what I mean is the bank's copy. They have no reason to keep it, but sure, maybe the government does. But again, if that's the case then I'm sure they would have had a backdoor to the live feed of all those existing ATM cameras anyway.

---

Sorry if that was a bit rambling, but I hope you get the gist. We share some of the same concerns but in my opinion, it's already game over unless we can bring more information into the equation. That data is already out there. Your photo is already on the ATM and every security cam you walked past to get there. The best thing you can do is to have a copy of that information yourself because right now you know less than they do, and that's how you lose.