Biometric Fingerprinting - Pag Talk

[Charles Flynn]

Positive Action Group

PRESS RELEASE

ISSUE DATE: 17th September 2007

 

Biometric fingerprinting on the Island

 

 

Island political lobbyists Positive Action Group have expressed concern about the

attempt to introduce biometric fingerprinting into Island schools without prior

consultation with parents.

 

A spokesman for P A G commented:

"If it wasn’t for the vigilance of a parent at Peel Cloth workers School, where this was going to be introduced for children to get books from the school library, the system would have been established in a number of other Island Primary schools.

"In our opinion this is a very worrying development, especially as it involved children"

"A number .of our members have expressed concern about the Isle of Man copying the UK practice of using recording biometric identity in Primary schools. We question why the decision was taken in the Isle of Man to replace secure paper records .

"On the face of it biometric fingerprinting seems innocuous, but it could be the first ofmany such intrusions into personal privacy. There should have been widespread meaningful public consultation before any such measures are introduced"

"Once a child's fingerprints have been encoded into a digital record the data can easily be distributed further within the system of Government. Who is to say where this data might be in ten years time? Children need to be educated in a culture of privacy so they don’t one day go on the Internet and give away their private details.

"Getting them to give their fingerprint data to a scanner in primary school is tantamount to grooming them to hand over their private data when so instructed by Government."

" It is ironic that the Chief Secretary is preparing a report on the question government consultation and at the same time consultation didn’t take place with parents oversuch a fundamental topic as fingerprint recognition.

To highlight the whole question of the undermining of civil liberties P A G has organised

a screening of the compelling film “ TAKING LIBERTIES” which exposes the shocking

truth about the erosion of civil liberties in the U K in recent years. P A G is anxious to

make the Manx public aware of this potential threat to individual freedoms

 

Their spokesperson went on to say:

“We urge people, especially parents, to see this controversial film – it’s not only for P A G members.

Admission is free and everyone is welcome, but places are limited – just reserve a seat

by phoning: 863106 or e mailing: info@positiveactiongroup.org”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“TAKING LIBERTIES”

7.30 p.m.Monday 22nd OCTOBER 2007

CLAREMONT HOTEL, DOUGLAS

Admission Free – Everyone welcome

To reserve a seat tel: 863106 or e mail: info@positiveactiongroup.org

 

EDITORS NOTE

 

 

2 For information about Positive Action Group

visit: www.positiveactiongroup.org

Contact W Roger Tomlinson

tel: 863106

e mail: info@positiveactiongroup.org

[Chinahand]

There was a Radio 4 news report a bit ago about something similar. In that case it was school meals - they'd set up the system where by the children had to be fingerprinted in order to pay digitally for their meals. If you didn't want your children to be fingerprinted it was pack lunches for them, no other way to pay. Rediculous.

 

For me this is a total misuse of the technology - a swipe card, an oyster card is a perfectly useable, appropriate system to install for this type of thing. To install fingerprint readers is just not acceptable in my mind, especially with no other way to pay - what would happen if you cut your thumb or whatever - no school meals or library books - pathetic.

[Pragmatopian]

Any personal information held about me for identification could potentially be used for nefarious purposes - I don't see why the fact that it's biometric rather than my name and address on a library card makes it any more sinister.

 

From a convenience point of view I'd love to be able to identify myself using biometrics, provided it's reliable. It could replace the need to carry passports, credit cards, business cards and fill in interminable forms for every transaction.

[Albert Tatlock]

"The world should apply what Natan Sharansky calls the "town square test": if a person cannot walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm, then that person is living in a fear society, not a free society. We cannot rest until every person living in a "fear society" has finally won their freedom."

 

Condoleeza Rice

 

 

Douglas Corporation Bylaw 2007...which fails the "town square test" IMO:

 

4. Processions

(1) No person shall hold a procession in any street, open area or foreshore

unless they have given notice in writing to the local authority not less than 7 days before

it is held, specifying –

 

(a) the date and time of the procession;

(b) its intended route;

© the number of persons likely to take part in it;

(d) the arrangements for its control being made by that person; and

(e) that person’s name and address.

 

(2) Where a notice under paragraph (1) is given to the local authority, the

authority may, not less than 2 days before the date on which the procession is to be held,

give to the person by whom the notice is given a direction in writing imposing conditions

on the holding of the procession, relating to –

(a) the time when it is to be held; and

(b) the route which it is to take.

 

(3) No person shall hold a procession in any street, open space or foreshore in

contravention of any condition contained in a direction given under paragraph (2).

 

(4) No person shall, if he is required to desist by a constable in uniform, take

part in a procession in any street, open area or foreshore –

(a) notice of which has not been given under paragraph (1); or

(b) in contravention of any condition contained in a direction given under

paragraph (2).

 

(5) This byelaw does not apply to a march by a contingent of Her Majesty’s

armed forces, or a procession forming part of a religious service.

[ai_Droid]

Any personal information held about me for identification could potentially be used for nefarious purposes - I don't see why the fact that it's biometric rather than my name and address on a library card makes it any more sinister.

From a convenience point of view I'd love to be able to identify myself using biometrics, provided it's reliable. It could replace the need to carry passports, credit cards, business cards and fill in interminable forms for every transaction.

 

Agree 100%. This is a particularly elegant solution for kids, who will lose swipe cards, dinner money, forget pin numbers. This is just a form of identity, I don't get why you would hop up and down about it.

[Albert Tatlock]

Any personal information held about me for identification could potentially be used for nefarious purposes - I don't see why the fact that it's biometric rather than my name and address on a library card makes it any more sinister.

From a convenience point of view I'd love to be able to identify myself using biometrics, provided it's reliable. It could replace the need to carry passports, credit cards, business cards and fill in interminable forms for every transaction.

 

Agree 100%. This is a particularly elegant solution for kids, who will lose swipe cards, dinner money, forget pin numbers. This is just a form of identity, I don't get why you would hop up and down about it.

Surely it's doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that the concerns between a paper based 'identity card' (locally stored paper or even a local electronic system) is all about the control and access of data. A biometric based identity card has to operate with a system that can confirm your 'data' which has to be stored electronically - and stored electronically worldwide in order to be verified worldwide.

 

Who has control of that data, access to that data, the security of that data, the fallability of biometric data, and the number of 'bad guys' on the Interweb - are peoples major concerns - especially when the whole world is interconnected via the Interweb. What that data could be used for, and by whom, are major concerns. Just look at what has happened to peoples bank details etc. in the past few years.

 

Then add state monitoring of movement etc. and you sleep walk into an existance where your every movement is monitored and recorded. That is not a free society.

[ans]

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that pretty much everything of importance is already stored electronically and available worldwide.

[Albert Tatlock]

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that pretty much everything of importance is already stored electronically and available worldwide.

Your tax records are not - yet.

[ans]

Riiiight, and they're going to be contained on my Biometric ID of course.

 

Do you buy tinfoil in bulk?

[ai_Droid]

Surely it's doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that the concerns between a paper based 'identity card' (locally stored paper or even a local electronic system) is all about the control and access of data. A biometric based identity card has to operate with a system that can confirm your 'data' which has to be stored electronically - and stored electronically worldwide in order to be verified worldwide.

 

This isn't a biometric identity card. It's using biometrics to identify an individual.

 

That's all there is to this, it's an identifier. What's the big deal? A swipe card will identify you in the same way, so does a signature. When you sign a cheque, it's scanned. What's the difference?

 

There's an issue of trust yes, but your fingerprint is hardly private data, it can be taken from you quite easily, and has been taken as idenity for a long long time. Suddenly you make this process electronic and the tin hatters start screaming. I don't get it.

 

Who has control of that data, access to that data, the security of that data, the fallability of biometric data, and the number of 'bad guys' on the Interweb - are peoples major concerns - especially when the whole world is interconnected via the Interweb. What that data could be used for, and by whom, are major concerns. Just look at what has happened to peoples bank details etc. in the past few years.

 

Same thing is true of any identity data, so what you gunna do? What you're talking about is a case for stronger identity ties to your actual self, which biometrics brings, not weaker.

 

Then add state monitoring of movement etc. and you sleep walk into an existance where your every movement is monitored and recorded. That is not a free society.

 

What's your alternative?

[Albert Tatlock]

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that pretty much everything of importance is already stored electronically and available worldwide.

Your tax records are not - yet.

Riiiight, and they're going to be contained on my Biometric ID of course.

 

Do you buy tinfoil in bulk?

You said 'Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that pretty much everything of importance is already stored electronically and available worldwide.' - I was responding to your statement. It is not, but there is a danger it soon will be available to whoever the UK government legislates it to be.

 

As for tinfoil, it takes little imagination, if you know how databases work, to see that someone can quite easily join up all of this information via the Internet and access to various systems via the Internet. For instance your tax records are already available, maybe not worldwide, but to many other jurisdictions where you neither elect the government, control their actions or indeed may never have been before. People can already build identity theft on very little information, much of which is already easily publicly available.

 

I hope no one puts you in charge of my information one day. You are assuming a perfect system, where everyone is honest and decent with no ulterior motives - but people, history, and even very recent history, demonstrate that the world doesn't work that way.

 

If you want to hand that control of your affairs over to someone else, feel free to do so - but don't assume I want to. This whole debate is really about what is a free society, and rights for those that live in a free society to determine (with the exception for purposes of law enforcement) who gets hold of information about them. Also, you are making a very fundamental error - based on 'information is already held' - when this does not make it right that it should be held, never mind justify the holding of additional data.

[ans]

I know a considerable amount about databases. However, this topic is nothing to do with that. It's a shame your raving paranoia can't see that none of your concerns really apply here specifically.

 

As mentioned above though, you cite identity theft as a major concern yet dismiss biometric identification with the same shake of your tinfoil hat. Surely you must see the inconsistency there.

[rednik]

I'm sure people know this already, but of course the actual fingerprint isn't stored anywhere. A digital scan of the image, uses computery stuff to generate a unique identifier. At no point is an actual image of the finger taken.

 

I would much rather this system in schools than a swipe card etc. It's really difficult for even the meanest of bullies to steal a finger!

[ai_Droid]

I'm sure people know this already, but of course the actual fingerprint isn't stored anywhere. A digital scan of the image, uses computery stuff to generate a unique identifier. At no point is an actual image of the finger taken.

I would much rather this system in schools than a swipe card etc. It's really difficult for even the meanest of bullies to steal a finger!

 

Yep, most of this tin hat stuff is just ignorance. You can be identified anywhere currently using biometrics, you're shedding dna all the time, leaving finger prints, your face is a recognisable pattern, your signature and of course your voice is a biometric pattern that's digitised every time you use the phone. Nobody gets upset about this, because it's not new.

[Albert Tatlock]

This isn't a biometric identity card. It's using biometrics to identify an individual.

There's no difference if you think about it. However, in this particular case the issues allegedly revolve around - collecting data without the parents permission, encouraging children to hand over their information without thought, and who has access to the data.

Suddenly you make this process electronic and the tin hatters start screaming. I don't get it.

Again, as I stated in my post, the difference with electronic data is interconnectivity, control and security of the data. Just think about the difference between your buildings security database to let you in (and who has access to it) - and where your data will be stored if you chose to travel somewhere in the world (and who has access to it).

Same thing is true of any identity data, so what you gunna do? What you're talking about is a case for stronger identity ties to your actual self, which biometrics brings, not weaker.

I'm not concerned about biometric data too much - only that the choice should be mine as to who gets my data (with few exceptions) - i.e. not every Tom, Dick and Harry in the event that I might turn up.

Then add state monitoring of movement etc. and you sleep walk into an existance where your every movement is monitored and recorded. That is not a free society.

What's your alternative?

Data transfer is restricted and in your control, held (minimally) with the democratically elected government where you live, and minimal data only passed to others outside when required for legitimate purposes of identification etc. when required (or for law enforcement purposes, with countries with which we have agreements). Records of people's movements should not be kept at all, and certainly DNA should not be kept at all (unless convicted), the storage of both which assume guilt before innocence - versus innocent before guilt, a concept enshrined in our 'free society' for 1000 years.