Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Biometrics scrutinised

Over on Kim Cameron's Identity Weblog he has been discussing the issues of using biometrics in schools.

Rather than duplicate points that are made in the Identity Weblog posts, reading the below is recommended, especially when it comes from the Architect of Identity and Access in the Connected Systems Division at Microsoft:

Biometric encrytion - 1st April "The fine discussion of the problems with conventional biometrics leaves one more skeptical than ever about their use in schools and pubs"

A sweep of their tiny fingers - 1st April "“As they munch their sloppy joes, these five and six year olds are happily ushering in the age of biometrics with a sweep of their tiny fingers…” Fox News"

Will biometrics grow up? - 31st March "Reading this paper will explain why it is way too early to use biometrics in schools - or pubs."

Hong Kong teaches London about civil liberties - 29th March "The school ripped out its system and destroyed all the fingerprint data it had taken from children"

U.K. wants beerdrinkers’ fingerprints - 29th March "Britain, get a grip!"

Mass fingerprinting of children will start in 2010 - 29th March "The plans are outlined in a series of “restricted” documents circulating among officials in the Identity and Passport Service"

If they don’t scan, they don’t eat - 29th March "As a professional detective, Joy Robinson-Van Gilder knows how easily fingerprint data can be obtained and misused. And as a mother, she is kicking up a one-person storm."

Make sure children are calm - 28th March "How to break four architectural laws in one go"

3,500 British schools fingerprinting their children - 27th March "British schools will be urged to seek parents’ permission before taking children’s fingerprints, under new guidelines. But calls to outlaw the controversial practice altogether have been rejected by the government."

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The argument for the wholesale gathering and retention of biometric information is based on the fiction that the technology and the human elements involved in processing that information are infallible. They are not.

We are in a cart before the horse situation where the use of biometric information is proliferating before the necessary safeguards are in place to ensure that individuals are adequately protected against malfunctioning equipment and expert error.

My daughter’s case represents a salutary lesson for those who would argue that the innocent have nothing to fear from the ‘biometric revolution’.

For further information see: http://www.shirleymckie.com/