Biometric Fingerprinting - Pag Talk

[ai_Droid]

Its the inverse of the example you used about your google password - in that case you used a weak password, and now what is behind that barrier is important.

 

Now, you're confusing what I'm talking about. That's an issue of authentication not identification. I agree that the scaling up of the information authentication is protecting is often a poor idea, but as I said earlier, fingeprinting has already been largely discarded as a system of authentication because it's so weak.

 

I believe your fingerprint information is going to become a very important password in the future - all sorts of information are going to be connected to it.

 

Again, two different things, identification and authentication. Think of it as the difference between a username and a password. As a method of identification sure, what you say above is true, but then so's your credit card, your store cards, hell even your face, and you use those with abandon. As a method of authentication, no, it's not going to be more important in the future, I'm pretty certain of that, for the reasons already mentioned. It's out in the public domain, and easy to copy, and systems like the proposal for the schools is only going to make it less likely to be used to authenticate anything important in the future.

 

But at the moment we are being forced to hand it out that password willynilly without the protections that need to be used to stop this information being abused in the future.

 

What information? Your thumbprint? Who cares?

 

Imagine being forced to use the same password for absolutely all your accounts - even trivial ones.

 

As above, doesn't apply. This isn't about passwords, its about identity.

 

At the moment my fingerprints aren't on many databases - those databases do not link to my bank accounts, tax records, etc. I bet you that in 10 years time they will. That concerns me - simple as that. I do not think the controls are in place to stop that digital information being abused at a later date if I am forced to hand it over to the library or whatever now.

 

Really missing how this is connected to biometrics specifically. Yes, your information is linkable, it's linkable by your name and date of birth. How does a biometric make a difference?

[ai_Droid]

What is the difference between using my thumb-print and a photo of me as my atavar - the photo isn't going to become a major security feature in future IT systems.

 

It is, or rather your face is actually a damn site more likely to be used for authentication in the future than your thumbprint.

[Cronky]

The problem is, people like you who generalise and moan about this kind of thing without understanding it restrict the rest of us who'd simply welcome a better way of doing things. Why should I be so inconveniced by your ignorance?

 

This is not about finding a better way of doing things. The point of biometric fingerprinting is that it encodes your unique signature into a digital form. It is this that enables the data to be rapidly transmitted and centralised. In the case of the UK it is the intention to have this information on the National Identity Register so that the state can track your life.

 

Have a look at what Baroness Williams said in a BBC report:

 

Peer 'ready to defy ID card law'

 

Is she ignorant? Is she a moaner?

 

You say:

You shouldn't be forced to do anything against your will of course.

 

In the case of school fingerprinting in the Isle of Man there, quite rightly, has to be an opt out due to Data Protection laws. Therefore, the school has to provide a manual system alongside the biometric one. This is as it should be. However, there will need to be more checks and balances in the future to protect peoples privacy as technology becomes more sophisticated.

[ai_Droid]

This is not about finding a better way of doing things. The point of biometric fingerprinting is that it encodes your unique signature into a digital form. It is this that enables the data to be rapidly transmitted and centralised. In the case of the UK it is the intention to have this information on the National Identity Register so that the state can track your life.

 

As China says, you're confusing the issue utterly. We're talking about using biometrics, in this case a thumbprint to identify a student who wants to borrow some books. The database that the library has already has his name, address, age, a history of the books he's had. They now, instead of giving him a number on a card, want to identify him with a thumbprint scanner, a better way of doing things, because kids lose cards. Mine hav lost their library cards already, it must happen loads. For some reason your tin foil hat has recieved this information and converted it to an ID card enforcing police state. Can you explain the connection?

 

 

 

Have a look at what Baroness Williams said in a BBC report:

Peer 'ready to defy ID card law'

Is she ignorant? Is she a moaner?

 

She's not moaning about biometrics, and she seems very clued on the subject. Here's what she's complaining about:

 

"And you won't be able to escape from it because the ID card which will be checked against your credit card will be a record of exactly where you've been, what you've done, who you've talked to. "

 

Naff all to do with biometrics, more to do with a convergance of data.

 

In the case of school fingerprinting in the Isle of Man there, quite rightly, has to be an opt out due to Data Protection laws. Therefore, the school has to provide a manual system alongside the biometric one. This is as it should be. However, there will need to be more checks and balances in the future to protect peoples privacy as technology becomes more sophisticated.

 

I won't argue with that, but the danger really is with people like you who force the old manual systems to stay in place because of your ignorance, holding back everyone else.

[Cronky]

I won't argue with that, but the danger really is with people like you who force the old manual systems to stay in place because of your ignorance, holding back everyone else.

 

Would you please stop calling me ignorant. I find it really rude.

 

If you want to learn more about the school fingerprinting debate then read:

 

Leave Then Kids Alone

 

There are wider issues than the administrative convenience of some schools.

[ai_Droid]

Would you please stop calling me ignorant. I find it really rude.

 

Just calling it how I see it. You're saying you won't allow your biometrics to be used, when they already are. You're making claims on a subject you seem to know very little about. That's ignorance isn't it?

 

If you want to learn more about the school fingerprinting debate then read:

Leave Then Kids Alone

There are wider issues than the administrative convenience of some schools.

 

Also covered earlier in this very thread. There's an awful lot of alarmist rot on that page, eg:

 

The 'harmless' number or algorithm stored by these systems is in fact a fingerprint template, the unchanging lifelong key to a child's identity.

 

Isn't their name a lifelong key to their identity?

 

The biometric data stored in schools could be used for serious identity theft when banks and passports adopt biometrics in a few years' time.

 

Incorrect, banks won't use fingerprint authentication, it's not secure enough. Banks are investing money into rolling out two factor authentication which is beginning now and will take a few years to complete.

 

The encryption used to secure the systems is good for 10 years at most. The biometric data needs to be kept safe for a child's entire lifetime.

 

Not really sure how this is relevant, but when data isn't encrypted it's not fixed to that encryption. If/when better encryption is developed, old data can simply be re-encrypted.

 

Your child could be falsely accused of a crime by an over-zealous head teacher.

 

Unreal.....this isn't a joke site?

[Cronky]

For some reason your tin foil hat has recieved this information and converted it to an ID card enforcing police state. Can you explain the connection?

 

 

We are not prepared to have the school scan our children's thumbprints because:

 

1. We feel it is important that they do not become conditioned into routinely giving away biometric data.

 

2. Due to identity theft it will be very useful to them in later life to learn how to protect their data.

 

3. We are concerned that if fingerprinting were to become widespread in the Isle of Man the data will eventually be stored centrally and beyond our control.

 

As parents we take a view that:

 

1. Schools should have used a letter containing a 'positive opt out'.

 

2. I.e. Parents should be asked to write in and positively confirm they are happy for the data to be extracted and stored in an agreed location for an agreed time.

 

3. We view that the Isle of Man authorities have reacted in an appropriate and timely fashion in accordance with local data protection laws which are more stringent than other jurisdictions.

 

4. As there is pressure from other jurisdictions for children's biometric data to be captured the issue needs wider debate to protect privacy.

[ai_Droid]

We are not prepared to have the school scan our children's thumbprints because:

1. We feel it is important that they do not become conditioned into routinely giving away biometric data.

2. Due to identity theft it will be very useful to them in later life to learn how to protect their data.

3. We are concerned that if fingerprinting were to become widespread in the Isle of Man the data will eventually be stored centrally and beyond our control.

 

1. They do anyway, you're just ignorant of it.

2. Sure, and a reasonable start would be to have them understand the difference between protecting genuine sensitive data and not a Daily Mail style kneejerk to fingerprinting in school.

3. I'm not that fussed if it is personally, what's the problem? But it won't be, because of the way biometric fingerprinting works. What you actually capture is a hash of key parts of the fingerprint. It's really not that useful to share.

 

1. Schools should have used a letter containing a 'positive opt out'.

2. I.e. Parents should be asked to write in and positively confirm they are happy for the data to be extracted and stored in an agreed location for an agreed time.

3. We view that the Isle of Man authorities have reacted in an appropriate and timely fashion in accordance with local data protection laws which are more stringent than other jurisdictions.

4. As there is pressure from other jurisdictions for children's biometric data to be captured the issue needs wider debate to protect privacy.

 

1. They probably didn't consider it a sensitive issue. I know I don't, and I know a lot of people who are bemused by the weird reaction of some

2. Jesus. Do you ask for this every time they photograph your child? That's a far more intrusive biometric than a fingerprint.

3. That's untrue, you probably pulled that from that daft site you linked? the IOM Data Protection Act 2002 is close to the european data protection act that the UK act is based on. You fan find it here. Search for 'fingerprint' or 'biometric', it's not there.

4. What pressure from other juisdictions? Show me.

 

“The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about” <-- that's you that is.

[Albert Tatlock]

We are not prepared to have the school scan our children's thumbprints because:

3. We view that the Isle of Man authorities have reacted in an appropriate and timely fashion in accordance with local data protection laws which are more stringent than other jurisdictions.

3. That's untrue, you probably pulled that from that daft site you linked? the IOM Data Protection Act 2002 is close to the european data protection act that the UK act is based on. You fan find it here. Search for 'fingerprint' or 'biometric', it's not there.

 

“The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about” <-- that's you that is.

Becta, the UK Government’s schools ICT agency advises:

 

Schools to fully involve parents in any decision to introduce biometric or fingerprint technology to run cashless lunch queues, school libraries and attendance systems.

 

It also advises that schools should recognise some parents’ or pupils’ concerns over the introduction of biometric technology and offer alternative systems, like smartcards, to access the same services if they want to opt out.

 

The guidance, produced in conjunction with the Information Commissioner, sets out how Data Protection Act 1998 applies to the use of biometric data in schools - building on Becta’s existing guidance on data security and the data protection law.

 

The Data Protection Act requires that:

 

• schools cannot use biometric information other than for the express purpose for which it was collected. This means that data taken for the use on in a library, can only be used for that purpose;

• schools process all personal data fairly and lawfully. This means that schools ensure that all pupils, or their parents if schools judge they cannot understand, know what personal information they have on record and how they intend to use it;

• schools cannot pass on biometric information to any outside organisation nor can third parties access this information;

• schools cannot keep personal data for longer than it is needed for its specified purpose. Pupils’ biometric data should therefore be destroyed when they have left the school.

• schools put appropriate security in place to safeguard personal data from unauthorised processing and accidental loss, destruction or damage. Becta gives clear guidance to schools on data and ICT security.

The Isle of Man data protection act is similar to the UK act, and as far as I am aware there is a great deal of communication between the UK and the island regarding the interpretation of information in the act. The islands data protection supervisor is also independent of the government. Biometric data is still personal data, IMO, and just as much care, responsibility (and adherence to purpose under data protection principles) should be taken into account.

 

Perhaps it might be good to see a similar 'guidance statement' issued by the islands data protection office - or between the ODPS and the Attorney general, as data protection is only but one law, and there are also other acts to take into account such as the human rights act, and basic confidentiality laws, which make the picture more complex and guidance (for those on both sides of the argument) essential IMO.

[ai_Droid]

Those bullets are all sound personal data protection practices, and I've got no problem with them at all.

[Albert Tatlock]

Those bullets are all sound personal data protection practices, and I've got no problem with them at all.

All well and good...but don't get so aggrieved just because some people seek the opportunity and assurance that they should be able to opt-out of such schemes.

[ai_Droid]

All well and good...but don't get so aggrieved just because some people seek the opportunity and assurance that they should be able to opt-out of such schemes.

 

Also agree, if their fears are sound, well researched and reasoned. They're not though, their daily mail knee jerks because the techonolgy is fingerprints. Pretty much everyone who's opposed to this in this thread has posted their reasons, and they're all bollocks. The daily mail articles linked are bollocks. The scaremonger site linked is bollocks.

 

I'll quote it again: “The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about”

 

That's what fustrates me. Research it, understand it, then if you're still worried, reject it.

[Mr. Sausages]

Like a dog with a bone...

[Ringwraith]

Also agree, if their fears are sound, well researched and reasoned. They're not though, their daily mail knee jerks because the techonolgy is fingerprints. Pretty much everyone who's opposed to this in this thread has posted their reasons, and they're all bollocks. The daily mail articles linked are bollocks. The scaremonger site linked is bollocks.

 

I'll quote it again: “The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about”

 

That's what fustrates me. Research it, understand it, then if you're still worried, reject it.

 

 

You must have missed my posts from the previous page:

 

It could know what your fingerprints look like.

 

Don't you normally need to be arrested for this to happen?

 

In March 2007, the British government was considering fingerprinting of children aged 11 to 15 as part of new passport and ID card (the latter having been recently implemented in the UK), also lifting opposition for privacy concerns. All fingerprints taken would be cross-checked against prints from 900,000 unsolved crimes. Shadow Home secretary David Davis called the plan "sinister."[22]

 

'Taken from Wiki'

 

My tin foil hat is picking up strong signals that you have a vested interest in this matter.

[ai_Droid]

Don't you normally need to be arrested for this to happen?

 

If I'm permitted to reply..

 

We're merging the schools using fingerprint biometrics to the identity card issue here, making the leap of faith that says a fingerprint scanner in the school dinner queue's data is going to find it's way in the hands of the police. I, personally, don't think that's possible.

 

In March 2007, the British government was considering fingerprinting of children aged 11 to 15 as part of new passport and ID card (the latter having been recently implemented in the UK), also lifting opposition for privacy concerns. All fingerprints taken would be cross-checked against prints from 900,000 unsolved crimes. Shadow Home secretary David Davis called the plan "sinister."[22]

 

My tin foil hat is picking up strong signals that you have a vested interest in this matter.

 

No vested interest, other than a desire to see technology used in ways that make life easier.

 

As for the quote above, yes, the identity card thing is a hot debate, and the home office knocked back the statements above saying there would be no police cross check. Personally I'd be perfect happy for a cross check to take place if it could be demonstrated that the cross check is reliable and backed up with other evidence reducing false accusations, and results in the reduction of crime.

 

It makes me laugh how the daily mail etc bleat constantly about crime and immigration, but then bleat even harder when something like ID cards are suggested as a way to tackle it.