Biometric Fingerprinting - Pag Talk

[Albert Tatlock]

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

You should also look at other quotes regarding ignorance at the same time, such as: "The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: Be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge.", and, "Never forget public ignorance is the government's best friend.”

[Ringwraith]

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.

 

Well that's not quite true is it vested interest Droid?

 

Opposition parties have expressed anger that all fingerprints collected for ID cards will be cross-checked against prints from 900,000 unsolved crimes.

 

No 10 insists it was always the plan to allow the checks, but the Tories and Lib Dems say they were not aware of it.

 

BBC LINK

[ai_Droid]

You should also look at other quotes regarding ignorance at the same time, such as: "The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: Be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge.", and, "Never forget public ignorance is the government's best friend.”

 

Both of which back up what I'm saying, research it and make up your mind in an informed way. Don't rely on smoking gun websites and daily mail claptrap.

 

Wraith, it is true, from your same article:

 

But the Home Office minister responsible for the identity card scheme, Joan Ryan, told the same programme that any check of the identity register would be made by approved Identity and Passport Service staff.

 

"There won't be any fishing expeditions. That is complete nonsense. That is not what can happen. We've always said one of the real advantages of identity cards would be the fight against crime and protecting the public.

 

Either way, none of this actually exists, it's still under debate, and rightly so.

 

How on earth have I got a vested interest? You're just showing your flair for drawing an incorrect conclusion with piss all evidence, like all the tin hatters.

[Ringwraith]

Wraith, it is true, from your same article:

 

But the Home Office minister responsible for the identity card scheme, Joan Ryan, told the same programme that any check of the identity register would be made by approved Identity and Passport Service staff.

 

"There won't be any fishing expeditions. That is complete nonsense. That is not what can happen. We've always said one of the real advantages of identity cards would be the fight against crime and protecting the public.

 

Either way, none of this actually exists, it's still under debate, and rightly so.

 

How on earth have I got a vested interest? You're just showing your flair for drawing an incorrect conclusion with piss all evidence, like all the tin hatters.

 

 

VI Droid, I said 'not quite true is it':

 

Mr Blair's spokesman said: "If the police ask for fingerprints to be cross-checked, that has always been part of the intention of the bill."

 

Stop lying about your vested interest, my tin foil hat is melting.

[Albert Tatlock]

You should also look at other quotes regarding ignorance at the same time, such as: "The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: Be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge.", and, "Never forget public ignorance is the government's best friend.”

Both of which back up what I'm saying, research it and make up your mind in an informed way. Don't rely on smoking gun websites and daily mail claptrap.

They don't IMO - I see you firmly 'within the box' on this one: you think you have researched it enough, yet villify any contrary opinion.

I'm Chinese and I find your ridiculing my english in that way highly offensive.

I found this very interesting, were you born there, and by how much are you influenced in your views by this I wonder? Indeed, are you there now?

 

Interestingly, "China is instituting biometric ID cards, beginning with the city of Shenzhen. The card will document data such as work history, educational background, religion, ethnicity, police record, medical insurance status, landlord's phone number and personal reproductive history."

 

For example, do you agree with what they are doing in China?

[Chinahand]

FFS Albert - he said craptrap and responded to a post on it in a light hearted way - Albert you are well known for your "l" "r" stereotypes - get real.

 

That said - creating government databases with your reproductive history, religion and ethnicity on it - lovely.

 

My main trouble is the huge databases been created to exploit this technology. I agree its a parallel issue, but the cross links are my main concern.

[Albert Tatlock]

FFS Albert - he said craptrap and responded to a post on it in a light hearted way - Albert you are well known for your "l" "r" stereotypes - get real.

 

That said - creating government databases with your reproductive history, religion and ethnicity on it - lovely.

 

My main trouble is the huge databases been created to exploit this technology. I agree its a parallel issue, but the cross links are my main concern.

Er - very much I resent that post, it was a genuine question. People can be effected/influenced by the environment/culture in which they are brought up. China, has both a communist government, and a very a distinct 'belief system' as well as a poor record on human rights when it comes to internet/data etc. issues. Such issues can affect/influence its population IMO.

 

You are right to be concerned as to cross-links, as am I - or the 'thin end of the wedge' as us 'tinfoil hats' tend to refer to it.

[ai_Droid]

Er - very much I resent that post, it was a genuine question. People can be effected/influenced by the environment/culture in which they are brought up. China, has both a communist government, and a very a distinct 'belief system' as well as a poor record on human rights when it comes to internet/data etc. issues. Such issues can affect/influence its population IMO.

 

You are right to be concerned as to cross-links, as am I - or the 'thin end of the wedge' as us 'tinfoil hats' tend to refer to it.

 

Hehe, Chinas right though, it was hopefully a fairly obvious joke from the typo.

 

There's a definate arms race going on, and it's hard to see the solution. With issues such as warming and the energy crisis, mass migration and instability look to become very serious problems in the years ahead. Pair that up with increasingly sophisticated financial and identity crime, and things begin to look pretty serious for the western world.

 

Whats the alternative?

[Albert Tatlock]

There's a definate arms race going on, and it's hard to see the solution. With issues such as warming and the energy crisis, mass migration and instability look to become very serious problems in the years ahead. Pair that up with increasingly sophisticated financial and identity crime, and things begin to look pretty serious for the western world.

 

Whats the alternative?

But what's really changed in 40 years? We've had the same problems and worse: Cold War and Nukes and a major arms race, and the break up of Russia and the subsequent lack of command and control; and worse terrorism (NI terrorism in the UK), as well as massive immigration over that period, and crime.

 

The solution doesn't always have to be some 'right-wing fascist tag and monitor everyone' solution, especially in a country supposed to be a democracy, and where everyone is supposed to be assumed 'innocent before guilty' and not vice-versa - and which has a 1000 year history of espousing such values.

 

The only real change is in technology, and in terms of identity, data can and should be restricted to those who need it and agree to the transfer i.e. between a bank and a customer. State driven biometric data usage if it is to be used should be limited, and not form the basis of 'a watch of all citizens'. The consequences of this technology usage are not being thought through properly, especially in terms of security of data, accountability and data transferrence. People seem so readily willing to forget that the state is there to serve us, and not vice versa, willing to forget recent history (especially WW2 and the build up to WW2), turning the police into the state police, as well as readily willing to allow those companies at the leading edge of this 'tag and monitor' technology to set the agenda for the convenience of a government willing to go along with it to help it cop-out of its responsibilities - all under the pretence that 'it is in our own interests'.

 

We're really talking about a failure by the state to tackle the bad guys and a government cop-out by tagging everyone as potential criminals, state errors of judgement in foreign policy by going around kicking hornets nests (and wondering why people get pissed-off and fight back!), and ever creeping taxation and a state-need to identify us so we can be taxed more. This is not what this country (both the UK and the island) is about, and it should be resisted all the way - even if only to ensure: the security of data, restriction on the transfer of data, accountability, and the correct use within the boundaries of our 'constitution' of such data.

[Cronky]

Quote from the Examiner 23 October 2007:

 

Iain McDonald, government data protection supervisor, said it was important that people didn't become conditioned into routinely providing such data for mundane purposes.

 

'Unfortunately identity theft is a rapidly growing crime and it is essential that all individuals protect their personal data including biometric data,' he said.

 

 

Quote from a letter in the Examiner 13 November 2007:

 

Iain McDonald, Isle of Man Data Protection Supervisor advised me: 'It is correct that these systems do not store thumbprints but it is possible to obtain a thumbprint from another source for example a crime scene and then by scanning that thumbprint on the system find a matching entry which would identify the individual. (If you could not do this then the system would not work as it could not identify a thumbprint). It is also true that these systems are being standardised and therefore the number stored in one system is likely to be the number stored in another.'

[ai_Droid]

'Unfortunately identity theft is a rapidly growing crime and it is essential that all individuals protect their personal data including biometric data,' he said.

 

Sure, he's the Data Protection supervisor, heh, what else is he going to say? He's right, you need to protect your data, the law also protects your data, we've discussed it above, and I agree with the principles outlined.

 

You've not answered any of my questions though, why are you so bothered about fingerprints when your school is happily collecting lots of other more sensitive biometrics every day?

 

What is actually your point?

 

Iain McDonald, Isle of Man Data Protection Supervisor advised me: 'It is correct that these systems do not store thumbprints but it is possible to obtain a thumbprint from another source for example a crime scene and then by scanning that thumbprint on the system find a matching entry which would identify the individual. (If you could not do this then the system would not work as it could not identify a thumbprint). It is also true that these systems are being standardised and therefore the number stored in one system is likely to be the number stored in another.'

 

 

Well, as he said, the systems aren't compatable and the data can't be cross checked, doesn't that go in favour of it being fine? You'd have to physically reconstruct a thumb, based on the record from the police, and run it manually through the biometric scanner in every school to get a hit. Hmm, likely!

 

Also, As he said, the police actually store the fingerprints, but not just one, all ten. A thumbprint biometric scanner doesn't even store one.

 

It's funny, this tech has been used for ages in business, nobody batted an eyelid. As soon as you provide it to kids, there's an uproar.

 

I'd personally rather my kids pay for their school dinner with a thumbprint than be duffed up for their dinner money, but then I don't read the Daily Mail or alarmist web sites

[Cronky]

systems are being standardised and therefore the number stored in one system is likely to be the number stored in another

 

What this means is that the number created in any fingerpint scanner will be the same number and can be used to recreate the unique data in the fingerprint. The digitally encoded data can be easily stored on a central database for use (or abuse) by government. As this is what is being planned in the UK and the EU you have to consider the implications of introducing the technology. The EU are intending that any child over the age of six will have their fingerprints taken and stored on passports. By default, if you refuse to go along with this your right to travel will be blocked. This is an infringement of civil liberties.

 

Quote from Baroness Walmsley in the House of Lords 22 March 2007:

In my field, education, schools now have control over the vast majority of their own budget. That is a good thing in the main, although there is enormous pressure on local authorities to find the money for the support services for which they are still responsible. They have to pick up the pieces when individual schools fail children, and that can be very hard. It makes schools vulnerable to the clever sales pitches of companies that sell them the latest whizz-bang techie idea or snake oil that will solve all their problems. I think that rather ironic description applies to the military equipment companies that have persuaded about 3,500 schools to buy equipment to fingerprint their pupils for purposes as trivial as borrowing library books or paying for their lunch.

 

I will not go into the detail of the practice here, since the Minister replying today will not be in a position to answer me. Suffice it to say that the DfES has really no idea what is going on out there. It does not know how many schools are doing this or how many children are affected. The noble Lord, Lord Adonis, in answer to a question from me earlier this week, revealed that his department is unaware that most of those schools are flouting good practice by not getting the parents' permission for this infringement of their children's rights. That is the sort of thing that can happen when services to the public sector are not properly monitored. The Government are walking blindfolded into a future identity fraud crisis, and the parents and children do not even know about it or realise the implications of the practice.

 

Proper monitoring of outsourced public services is essential. Having opened up the market and allowed schools to spend their own money, the Government must introduce statutory guidance to regulate schools that use those systems. It is simply bad practice for schools to keep a record of children's precious and unique biometric information, sometimes on insecure computers that can be hacked into, without parents' informed consent. The Government should do something about it before it is too late.

 

The noble Lady is indeed well informed. A major supplier of biometric fingerprinting in the UK is Vericool which is subsiduary of Anteon which trades ad General Dynamics - the US defense contractor.

[ai_Droid]

What this means is that the number created in any fingerpint scanner will be the same number and can be used to recreate the unique data in the fingerprint. The digitally encoded data can be easily stored on a central database for use (or abuse) by government. As this is what is being planned in the UK and the EU you have to consider the implications of introducing the technology. The EU are intending that any child over the age of six will have their fingerprints taken and stored on passports. By default, if you refuse to go along with this your right to travel will be blocked. This is an infringement of civil liberties.

 

We're going in circules here. We're talking about stand alone school scanning systems. It's actually against the law, as has been demostrated earlier in this thread to use this data in the way you describe, even if it was possible, which it isn't.

 

Christ, you're trusting the schools with your children, yet you wont trust them with a hash of their fingerprint? Madness.

 

The Government are walking blindfolded into a future identity fraud crisis...

 

...children's precious and unique biometric information, sometimes on insecure computers that can be hacked into..

 

The noble Lady is indeed well informed. A major supplier of biometric fingerprinting in the UK is Vericool which is subsiduary of Anteon which trades ad General Dynamics - the US defense contractor.

 

Security companies work for the military shocker.

 

The lady isn't well informed at all. Schools being ripped off might be true, but explain to me how fingerprints will create a future identify fraud crisis. In your own words please, not just posting someones generalised bollocks.

 

A school dinner/library system hacked, heh. Comedy.

[Albert Tatlock]

What this means is that the number created in any fingerpint scanner will be the same number and can be used to recreate the unique data in the fingerprint.

I am not a number, I am a free man.

[Cronky]

Subject discussed today on Manx Radio