Updates coming... new developments

Since I started this blog over 10 years ago the state of surveillance, monitoring and application of biometric technology used in schools on our children, the next generation, has increased beyond imagination.  Okay, there may be arguments that his 'improves' their education, enables better educational analysis, reduce admin time/costs, etc... but personally, I've not seen a dramatic increase in the next generations intellectual ability or schools being more affluent because of technology.  Certainly here in the UK we currently have a national funding crisis in education. 

Credit: https://www.pinterest.co.uk
/pin/68539225552401806/

It is a different education that is needed for today's kids.  Access to information is greater to an individual than ever before.  Knowing and retaining information in this age maybe is not a necessity as much as it was.  Moreover how to apply that knowledge in this ever changing society perhaps is a skill children should learn.  Discernment, where one's digital footprint is left and the data left again one's digital identity should also be considered.  How, who and what may be assumed by a children's online activities on the Internet - and within a school network - is a burgeoning area that needs urgent consideration, especially for those it could potentially affect in decades to come. 

With governments, private education tech companies and private companies running schools having access to individual educational data from the age of 2 years old (in the UK) to 19 and beyond gives an enormous potential for profiling.  I could write about this for an age, as these are all points that have been raised with the proliferation of technology in education for the past decade plus.

What to do?  I have been absent somewhat from blogging here as the transfer of biometric technology tested used on children in the UK has now widened into the rest of society.  My concern is when the state uses biometric technology without consent, much as schools did from 2001 - 2013 in the UK.  I set up a sister blog a couple of years ago to keep the two developments of biometric technology, schools / wider society, separate - see my State of Surveillance website.

However, there is now an issue of facial recognition creeping into US and Chinese schools for a variety of reasons.  Here in England and Wales (not Scotland or Northern Ireland) facial recognition is not viably an option for schools with under 18 year olds, as per the consent required under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.   The argument for the use of biometrics in schools - whether  fingerprint or facial recognition - is basically unproven, as other, less invasive, less 'valuable', means of identification will suffice.   This is an issue I intend to raise again here.

So, hopefully, (in a rather large nutshell) I've explained my absence and fully intend at least once a week to start again back here.   T'will be nice to get back to it!

Facial recognition scrapped in San Diago schools

Encinitas Union School District has scrapped iPad facial recognition replacing passwords.  A system that was thought to initially cost $63,000 spiraled to $189,000 purely for "eliminating a common complaint: having to remember too many passwords for various programs on the devices."

How utterly ridiculous!  If children cannot remember a few passwords to log into an iPad how on earth is a school to hope children will retain lesson content?

What is more worrying is that teachers also "dedicate a lot of time to logging in".  Apparently with this new facial recognition programme it is a “walk through one door and you’re into everything,”...erm, isn't that what an iPad password does anyway?


The whole sales pitch on this was completely flawed - in fact it was a load of rubbish and parents were not falling for it.  A solution to a problem that simply did not exist and parents rightly saw through this.


It's strange isn't it?  Outside school children are quite capable of remembering passwords for computers, tablets and mobile phones.  As a parent I can absolutely say that I have never heard another parent moan about their child's inability to remember a password or had any conversation with another parent about their child's passwords being stolen or compromised.  So it's very odd that when a child enters school this sudden amnesia becomes a problem that potentially costs the tax payer $189,000.  I would say that is unbelievable. 

If maybe, possibly, this peculiar amnesia is true, then surely $189,000 could be better spent to fund research into this strange phenomenon of kids forgetting passwords...  I don't think we'll see that happen because this sudden loss of memory in our children does not exist - and we parents know it.

A petition was set up by a parent that gained over 360 signatures and was successful in swaying opinion that biometric facial recognition is a completely unnecessary and inappropriate technology to use with children.

Findbiometrics say on the failed programme-

"At a time when biometric technology is increasingly finding applications in schools – from deployments as innocuous as cafeteria lunch administration to more serious security systems – the EUSD fiasco signals how precarious this area can be, given the privacy and security concerns that often seem to come up with public biometric deployments, and parents’ particularly strong interest in protecting their kids."   

-  No sh*t Sherlock.

Biometric facial recognition in education

Facial recognition is a biometric technology not much used in education.  If it is to be used it has been mooted that it will track children’s facial expressions to gauge response to lessons or on screen learning but it is now starting to creep into identifying and verification of students.

In the UK, facial recognition systems are not used in schools with the exception of one small instance of facial recognition being used in education in 2010 at the City of Ely Community College for registration purposes.  The college no longer uses the facial recognition system as it wasn’t suitable for the purpose intended; the scheme ran for around an academic year before being scrapped.

U-T San Diego file photo

Now the technology has matured over the past 5 years, facial recognition is coming back into education.  Encinitas Union School District, in California, students will log in to their iPads via facial recognition technology for a first-of-its-kind pilot project.  This involves the iPad scanning the child’s face every 60 seconds claiming to help kids log on to technology and for them not to forget their passwords.  If a child cannot be taught to remember their password then what hope is there for the schools to actually educate them!   This is not about remembering passwords or saving time logging on.  This is about constantly verifying the student so that the data controllers running the educational software can accurately gather data on that individual.  So here facial recognition is being used to identify and continuously verify.  Not without controversy though, parents are not happy with this constant biometric facial scanning for a number of reasons, invasion of privacy of minors and a that it a waste of money, with a petition set up against the facial recognition technology being used in this schools district.

From the San Diego Union Tribune:

“Encinitas Union launched its iPad program in 2012, equipping each third-through sixth-grade student with a device to use for school work and lessons. Since then, the district has put iPads into the hands of all of its 5,400 students, at a cost of $2.7 million.
“It’s creepy to take a photograph of a kid every 60 seconds,” said Gil Saidy, who has a third grade son at Flora Vista Elementary School. “I don’t trust them. I don’t want these roving cameras in my house.”

“It’s a momma-bear’s instinct to protect their child. I just don’t know who has access to the face scans,” said another parent, Darcy Brandon. “Where is the data being stored?”

The pilot program would start with 100 students and, if successful, the technology could ultimately be added to all district iPads. Parents must opt-in to have their child use biometrics.”

At the very least it is an opt-in scheme so hopefully most parents will have the common sense to say ‘no’ to this unnecessary use of facial recognition, desensitising our kids to constant monitoring.

Unlike fingerprint or palm scanning biometrics used in schools, facial recognition is a non-participatory biometric with the ubiquitous scanning happening without conscious involvement.  What else is the facial scanning revealing?   

Educational companies are lining up with emotional face biometrics coming into education gauging how a student is feeling, where their eyes are looking, how they are reacting.  An article from September 2013 reports that SensorStar Labs have a product that records “When the student is looking up at the teacher, the teacher score goes up.  If she looks down at the computer, the computer score goes up. So we’re tracking facial expressions.  If she makes a smile, it might be indicative that is enthusiastic about the topic.”

Facial recognition has also been introduced at St Mary's High School, St Louis, for 'safety' reasons only allowing in to school registered members on the database.  This is thought to be the first instance of facial recognition being used in this way in the States.  There is also a 'watch list' of peoples faces not allowed in the school that alerts law enforcement if those persons of interest try to enter.  Presumably opting out of this facial recognition system is not an option for pupils as it would deny them entry to education.

Facial recognition seems to be emerging as the new educational biometric.  Not for the student convenience or safety, more about verification of data capture... who is where, doing what and when. 

Children are the most data mined section of our society.  Biometric facial verification more accurately authenticates the data grab and profiling of our kids.  

Florida Gov signs legislation to ban biometrics in schools & SIBA's reaction

Florida Gov Rick Scott

Florida Governor Rick Scott signed SB188 on May 12th 2014 which banned biometrics in schools. Groundbreaking legislation, the first of its kind globally.

This now sets a precedent for other like minded states to follow in the same vein.  Governor Scott signed the legislation, as a part of a number of measures to "prevent unnecessary collection of data from our students", to more free up Florida's commitment to the controversial Common Core education initiative.

In the meantime the newly formed Security Identity and Biometrics Association (SIBA), born out of Washington DC in February 2014 (coincidentally in the month the Florida legislature voted overwhelmingly in support of the biometric ban), is very keen to see a halt to schools banning biometrics.

So much so, they have devoted a sizable proportion of their website detailing how SIBA plans to  produce four Fact Sheets, under a promotion named KickStart, to be aimed presumably at schools "to dispel myths; advance positive legislative solutions; report on school uses, successes and challenges; and support schools and their vendors seeking positive change for their communities" costing $2,500 each.  These facts sheets will be advertising the companies that sponsor the sheets.

I could write some fact sheets about biometric technology used by children in schools, with their use both in the UK and US over the past decade for considerably less money, that would be carefully referenced with facts, via citations.   So I await with baited breath to see what 'facts' these four Fact Sheets costing $10,000 will contain.  Hopefully the sheets will have independent, credible evidence to back up any facts made and I look forward to reading them - that is if SIBA publishes them on their website.

SIBA's drive to get schools on board is subtly said in a photograph on this page carrying the statement that "Schools need our help!", when in reality the education system is working absolutely fine without children authenticating themselves via a measurement of their body to eat, register or take a book from a library.

Do adults use biometric technology in order to eat?  No.  In fact there is distrust about biometrics in adult society and is there any wonder with this recent headline from Biometric Update "Canadian academics, privacy groups issue statement against mass spying".  When data protection and privacy laws are not enforceable and general unease lies with biometric technology, why is there a drive to encourage children in schools to use their biometrics?  

Some might say that it is not in the government's interest to have schools ban biometrics when really their agenda is to soften the next generation to the technology, using a compliant environment to do so?

An upcoming event SIBA are having in June 2014 is "closed door" with two speakers, Alan Bersin, Acting Assistant Secretary for policy for the US Department of Homeland Security and Vice-president for the Americas Interpol and Bob Mocny, Director in the Office of Biometric Management, part of the  US Department of Homeland Security.  It is not boding well for transparency when one of SIBA's first events is 'closed door' and the speakers are from a US government department which is widely perceived as having largely eroded the privacy of the people of the United States.

I feel, for me and others concerned about the use of biometric technology with children, SIBA looks like a US government led organisation bent on promoting biometrics in schools, worried by the recent legislation passed in Florida.  I have asked SIBA how they are funded, who their members are and where and when they were conceived as this information is not on their website.

Openness and clarity from SIBA is vitally important on this so that we, as parents, are aware of who is driving the agenda for our children to authenticate themselves with biometric identifiers for day to day services in education...  I await SIBA's answer.

Florida bans biometrics in schools, and the industry's "emerging fight" against it

It has been interesting to follow the progress of the Florida legislature to ban schools from taking and processing children's biometrics, the process of which started late last year.  It will be the first time in the USA or worldwide that biometrics have been banned in schools, when Gov Rick Scott signs the bill.  Some have argued that the UK Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 should have gone this far but instead we have that schools can only process a child's biometric data with written parental consent.  However, how parents are fully informed to make that consent still leaves the process open to spin and ambiguity surrounding the technology and its capabilities.

In Florida three bills were filed dealing with Florida schools using biometrics, during September and October 2013. With one, SB188 relating to education data privacy, being passed on April 11 2014. It reads (see lines 49-66):

(1) An agency or institution as defined in s.1002.22(1) may not:

(a) Collect, obtain, or retain information on the political affiliation, voting history, religious affiliation, or biometric information of a student or a parent or sibling of the student.  

The bill passed by 113 Yeas to 1 Nay. 

This news has been met by the biometric industry in the United States with fears it may lead to other states approving similar bills.  There are already laws in other states concerning parental consent for schools to use biometric technology but SB188 goes one step further, by banning it.

Many experts, privacy organisations and others have aired concerns over children using their biometrics in school for a variety of reasons:
     - Security of data - What does a child do if their biometric data is compromised?  How and when would that become apparent?  Leaps and bounds in technology cannot possibly foresee how this could play out in the decades to come.
     - The personal information that is held against the biometric - Reading or eating habits, who views that?

     - The sharing of biometric data and personal data stored against it - Government agencies now routinely take biometric data and upload it to other databases.

     - The subtle psychological message using this technology gives to children, that to gain access to books/knowledge, food/money, normalises the use of biometrics for mundane yet essential activities.   

Janet Kephart of the Secure Identity and Biometrics Association (SIBA), set up in February 2014, states that one of four biggest challenges of 2014 is to help clear the air in "a newly emerging fight in state legislatures whereby there is a push to ban biometrics in public schools".  

Kephart claims that, "Biometric technologies do not store identities; they store templates".  Surely template/s based on a particular person are designed to identify said person, otherwise how would the system work?  Then the next statement contradicts her earlier statement by saying, "To further assure privacy, names are kept separate from the biometric templates, encrypted, and not directly linked with the biometric data".  Yes, so they are linked then but encrypted.  Indeed, one might liken this to doublespeak?

She then, unsurprisingly, states the usual line to be seen and heard in the spiel dished out to schools in the USA and UK by biometric vendors, "...the outline of fingerprints aren’t stored like an image – they’re turned into a set of series of numbers that can’t be reverse engineered."  Yes, a set of numbers that is digitally transferable between databases.

With regards to Florida banning biometrics in schools (with SIBA only being set up two months earlier with a view to, "educate folks about the reality of biometrics, bridging the gap between Washington and the industry" , maybe SIBA was set up because of SB188?) Janet Kephart states:

“Nobody in Florida decided to do due diligence on this... [presumably she has proof of this allegation]  No one clearly went out and asked how biometric technology actually works … nobody asked the question. It was just basic public servant due diligence that they didn’t do and there’s really no excuse for that.”

Just a minute... where was the "due diligence" of the biometric industry from 2001 onwards effectively testing biometric technology on children by fingerprinting 4 year olds to get a library book out, using infrared palm scanners trialled on primary school children in 2006 so they could eat, iris scanning children for lunch lines in 2007, facial scanning kids in 2010 to stop them from turning up to school late, voice biometric planned in 2007 for students, and (partly what prompted SB188) a Florida school district iris scanning 700+ children to travel on a bus?  All without parental consent or appropiate discussion, hence the legislation in the US States and the UK.

And SIBA want to talk about due diligence?   An apology would be more fitting.

Let's tell it how it really is.  In this article is an astonishing, yet bluntly open, account of why Saudi Arabia are introducing biometrics in schools, explaining below the exact reasons for biometrics and CCTV.  Surveillance.  It is a "form of supervision", to" install a sense of discipline", to "track children", to make them "respect regulations" and gain "better productivity".  At least there is some honesty here, more than we have had from the biometric industry and government on this issue in the US and UK for the past decade.

Kevin Townsend, original founder of ITsecurity.com, puts it most succinctly in his March 2014 article - Why we must keep biometrics out of schools - definitely worth a read.

Florida moves to ban use of biometrics in schools

Florida introduces three bills for biometrics in schools

After the appalling iris scanning of 750 Florida school children in May 2013, without their parents knowledge, to get on a school bus Senator Dorothy Hukill introduced two bills to the Florida Senate, SB232 and SB188 dealing with biometrics in schools.

SB232 would simply prohibit schools from taking and processing students biometrics whilst SB188 would allow schools or school districts to set policies on how biometric technology could be used.

“And the parents have to opt in, give permission for the information to be taken from their child,” Hukill said of SB188.

“Who would even think a school would take this kind of information from children?” Hukill said. “We've had children get on buses and go through lunch lines for years without taking their biometric information. Why do we need to do this? And if we are going to do this then why not have a policy in effect?”

Good questions indeed Senator Hukill!  

On 21st October 2013 Senator Jake Raburn introduced House Bill HB195 - 'Provides that students & parents have certain rights relating to submission of biometric information; requires school district that collects student biometric information to implement policies governing collection & use of information; requires security of information & notification if security is breached; provides penalties'  - which is a near replica of SB188.

It will be interesting to see the bills journey through the senate.  Here is a brief explanation of the difference between Senate Bills and House Bills.

Really? 'Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students Every Move'

Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students' Every Move

Just look how invasive biometrics can be in the classroom with this article from Yahoo attractively entitled 'Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students' Every Move'.

[Title of article changed in the 24 hours of writing this article to 'Will Big Brother Be Watching Your Kids?' - lots more accurate, thank you.  Original title still in the URL.]

Is where we are heading in society, not just with education, but with all aspects of our life, advertising, interviews, shopping, etc?

If teachers need this level of aid to teach or improve their teaching they simply should get out of the profession.  This level of personal data should not be analysed with children nor anyone.  At what point as a society do we say that enough is enough and that there needs to be some privacy? ...but this is not the case.  Britain houses something like a quarter of the world's CCTV cameras, here we are surveilled by consent apparently.  Our crime rates are completely comparable to other western countries as is our conviction rate so why the intrusion by CCTV?  And not take some down?  Once surveillance systems are in place they tend not to be disabled, if anything they become more invasive as technology improves.

With facial recognition being used covertly, with the US state of Ohio justifying  "the installation without any prior warning or legal oversight of a facial recognition system using public data bases and CCTV, arguing that “every other state is doing so”, do we need to worry about the capabilities of the surveillance cameras on the street or in the school classrooms?  We are in a sad position to have to trust that more data is not being taken and gathered on us or our children than we believe.

The capability of technology is great, not always so great is the intent.

We are being normalised to accept this surveillance and it is happening first in our schools.  Get them while they're young...

Parents concerns scrap fingerprinting in Pennsylvania

Schools in York City School District have scrapped fingerprint biometrics for lunch payments after a complaint by a parent at Jackson Elementary over concerns of how "their children's finger prints were being used and they were not properly notified".  By speaking out, effect can be made.

The school district says no fingerprints are kept - let's be accurate, the digital identifier of the fingerprint is kept and, although the school district say children's information is not shared, there is a potential for sharing with other agencies.  Here in the UK this could potentially happen (see questions 50 and 51).  Agencies keep digital identifiers of a fingerprint, much as the school does.  Fingerprint biometric databases can inter-operate.

"a district leader told CBS21 off the record that parents would not be concerned if they were fully informed."  Actually if parents *were* fully informed, a few more parents would most probably be very concerned.  

"...the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago”

I didn’t know quite where to come from on this one from the School Transportation News, the fact that on company "offers a touchless fingerprint scanning system, which claims to read fingerprints from up to 6 meters away" or the quote that comes from Jay Ange, the Director of Sales, at IDair, Alabama, the company selling the touchless fingerprint scanners.

“Still, privacy issues remain as the general public may not know exactly how biometric fingerprint technology works, but the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago, Ange said.”

“the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago”.  I would agree 100% with that statement.  We all need to be super vigilant about the information trail each of us leaves every day, how and where we travel, buy goods, use energy (with the advent of smart meters), images caught on CCTV and be especially aware if technology exists that scans your fingerprint from 6 meters away...

Parent pressure in Maryland USA scrap school palm scanners

Parent pressure in Carroll, Maryland, has persuaded the school district to scrap controversial palm scanners in 10 schools after parents "said the system violated their children's privacy".

John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute and a constitutional lawyer asked School Superintendent Stephen Guthrie to review using an opt-in process, as Whitehead said "with private information and kids, I much prefer an opt-in" and here in the UK our parliamentarians agree in this.  

This opt-out form of gaining consent was used in the UK and has been much criticized. Opt-in consent enacted into law May 2012 becomes enforceable September 2013.

Stephen Guthrie made this rather surprising statement "We felt the scans fell under normal school process."   Really?  Is it 'normal' for schools to take a child's biometric marker in exchange for food?  Adults do not do that in society so why on earth would it be a "normal school process" to introduce a system, alien to the society outside a school, that normalises such a disproportionate use of biometrics - with children? 

As with all biometric systems sold to teachers, a solution is pitched to speed up lunch lines, streamline operations and cut costs.  Teachers being told it's normal technology to use in schools.  Normal for whom? 

Surely if these teachers in schools actually sat back and really thought about it... really? ...fingerprinting kids for lunch?  Infra-red palm scanning for food?  Is it really worth trading a child's personal biometrics to shave a few dollars off a budget?  

Children have rights, and society's morals, ethics and civil liberties outside school must permeate to within a school too.  Thankfully these parents enabled this to happen.

Infrared palm scans out-biometric fingerprints for school lunches

What is so wrong with school fingerprint biometrics that warrants over $100,000 being spent on biometric palm scanning equipment to replace an existing fingerprint payment system?  Source Palm Harbor News, Florida

Did the fingerprint system break down, is it not secure enough or perhaps the new vogue in biometrics for kids is the infrared palm scanner?

Or maybe fingerprint biometrics are just not fast enough to propel students at the desired speed through cafeterias as "this high-tech scanning system will make the lunch line move faster" ...faster even than fingerprint biometrics?   Undoubtedly, biometric vendors will be selling differing biometric systems to school by 'miles per hour' lunch line speeds!

"The new palm-scanning program, piloted at Boca Ciega High School, cost the district $105,000. It replaces a finger scan system used in county middle and high schools since 2005.

"Pinellas County Schools are the first in the nation to use a palm scanning system"

A proud claim indeed. Of course, we have Scottish children to thank for Boca Ciega High School's first infrared claim, although competition is hot on their heels by kids in Reading Schools District, Ohio.

The Amey/ Fujitsu palm scanning technology was first introduced to Scottish primary schools back in 2007.  Presumably the Scottish trials went well enough to market infrared palm scanning to the US.  After all the US had around 49 million school children as opposed to an approximate meagre 9 million in the UK.  A more lucrative US market, especially when imminent legislation here in the UK may require full parental consent to be gained by schools for biometrics to be used with students.

The speed of which school lunch queues move seems to be an ever evolving, publicly expensive, obsession held by schools and biometric companies on both sides of the pond.

Here's an idea, maybe the thousands of pounds and dollars spent on such systems could be invested in childrens education instead?

It seems that across the world the UK is being held up as bad practice fingerprinting our children in schools.

This from James Heiser from http://www.thenewamerican.com/

"The decision to permit the mechanisms of the national security state to intrude into the most routine aspects of the lives of children as young as four is not only degrading and absurd — it is educating impressionable youths to take for granted that the State will track their every movement, action and thought for the rest of their lives.

 Such needlessly pervasive interference in the lives of children is so scandalous that even continental European bureaucrats understand that it is wicked."

School upsets parents by fingerprinting their kids

More than 700 students were fingerprinted last week by the Clinton County School District and some parents aren't happy. Parents learned about the fingerprinting only after it happened.

Unbelievable! Seems that the school authorities in the UK and USA are simply not grasping that before they go finger scanning, storing and recording our kids biometric data they must communicate with us on this or risk alienating the parent population . Some parents, in the UK, were so angered by this they went to the police.

Fingerprinting children for food reduces schools "annoyances"

On the fingerprinting of children for food in schools, doubts arise:

“The benefits certainly do not justify the privacy violations that we’re seeing,” said Alessandra Meetze, executive director of the Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

But Beverly Blough, the director of food service in Wood County School District, West Virginia, cited that the pressures of No Child Left Behind was the reason why West Virginia schools used biometric systems -apparently it would...

“ ...reduce the annoyances that would take the principal and staff away from education and focusing on things that were relatively minor in a student’s day.”

A mother, Joy Robinson-Van Gilder, from Illinois who has been instrumental in bringing about a change in the the law in Illinois to limit/regulate how biometric technology is used with children, said:

“It just opens a huge database out there that’s just easy for identity theft, I think it’s against their civil rights, without a doubt, and it is an invasion of privacy.”

Iowa rejects the re-introduction of fingerprint scanners in schools

Des Moines Register, Iowa, USA, reports the bills that are up for debate, and therefore possible legislation, and those that are not to be debated and made into law.

"...state lawmakers pushed dozens of bills through committee, saving them from today's so-called "funnel" deadline. The week is a pivotal time for legislation. Bills that made the deadline will be debated. Those that failed the funnel are done."

Biometric fingerprint scanners in schools didn't make it through the 'funnel'.

LIKELY DEAD

FINGERPRINT SCANNERS: Some schools want to be able to use fingerprint scanners to speed children through lunch lines, the library checkout and bus boarding. State lawmakers outlawed the devices for school use in 2005 amid concerns about legal issues, privacy and information hacking. And this idea was stripped from Senate Study Bill 3010 this year.

American Civil Liberties Union voice concerns using childrens fingerprints for food purchase

Chuck Samuelson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, Minnesota on the possible introduction of fingerprint scanners for lunch lines at Oltman Junior High in St. Paul Park and East Ridge High School.:

"This is a solution in search of a problem. It just baffles me. Of all the problems schools face, is this really an issue?"

Officials think it will speed up lunch lines, solve the problem of children forgetting their ID numbers and prevent identity theft (?!)

But the comments from the biometric vendor in this article are quite bizarre and would be funny if they weren't so seriously off the mark :

"There always seems to be this knee-jerk reaction that somehow, some way, a person is giving up their identity." - putting a child's biometric details on a relatively unsecure system, biometric details that have to be secure for the lifetime of the child, decades in fact, for insignificant tasks such as paying for food I would argue IS most definitely "giving up their identity" to significant risk.

When you bear in mind the obvious fact that computers are advancing at a great rate along with transferable softwear from biometric database to biometric database (and with that hackers abilities) that using childrens biometric for mundane administrative tasks is wholly inappropriate.

This biometric vendor goes on to say:

"It's absolutely the opposite. It actually protects a person's identity." - right...

Utah to fingerprint pupils for lunches?

In Utah, parents are to discuss this month whether the use of fingerprint technology, for lunch payments and monitoring childrens eating habits, in Draper public schools is appropriate.

Let's hope they make a sensible informed decision - listen to the schools reasoning but also take on board other expert opinion, such as Microsoft's Architect of Identity, Kim Cameron.

Arizona Senate bill bans biometrics in schools

Arizona, USA, have a bill SB1216 banning biometrics in schools, details below and here is the 'fact sheet' of the bill.

It heartening that people are taking on board the issues that arise with the, increasingly obvious, inappropriate use of biometric technology with children in schools.

When it was reported that Espiritu community schools in Phoenix, USA, fingerprinted children, without informing parents, in mid January 2008 it taken a little over a month for this bill to happen.

I hope this speedy action shames our Labour UK Members of Parliament to act as the elected people of Arizona have, i.e. working the people that elected them - although I'm not holding my breath.

Well done to mum, Shirley Wallace, Arizona State Sen. Karen Johnson and State Rep. Andy Biggs, the others that supported this bill and Fred Bellemy, a Phoenix attorney who specializes in Technology Law for their efforts to bring this bill about in such a short amount of time.

REFERENCE TITLE: schools; biometric information; prohibition

State of Arizona Senate, Forty-eighth Legislature, Second Regular Session 2008

SB 1216

Introduced by
Senators Johnson, Blendu: Gray C, Harper; Representative Pearce

AN ACT

amending Title 15, chapter 1, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 15-107; relating to school pupils.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 15, chapter 1, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 15-107, to read:

START_STATUTE 15-107. Biometric information; prohibition; definition

A. School districts and charter schools shall not collect biometric information from pupils.

B. For the purposes of this section, "biometric information" means any information that is collected through an identification process for individual persons based on unique behavioral or physiological characteristics, including fingerprints, hand geometry, voice recognition, facial recognition, iris scans or retinal scans. END_STATUTE

Oh the possibilities...

Dan Brawner seems to have his finger(print) on the pulse here -

LIVING IN IOWA: Forget your signature: soon the biometric thumbprint will be the new national ID

by Dan Brawner · February 06, 2008

I’m sure the Iowa Department of Education only wanted what’s best for us when they proposed the “thumbprint bill” that would have students use a biometric thumbprint scan in paying for school lunches and checking out library books. They assure us the thumbprints will not be stored or shared with government agencies or businesses. They argue convincingly that students will have to spend less time standing in lines and the new technology will keep them safer by tracking their whereabouts.

I can understand why a sophomore in his desperation to check out a copy of War And Peace does not have time to laboriously sign his name for the librarian. But after all, attendance in an institution of higher education does presuppose a certain degree of literacy. If they make it too easy to sign a document, you discover later you’ve sold Manhattan for a handful of beads.

If the thumbprint thing catches on in schools, pretty soon Mastercard will say, why carry around those silly plastic cards that could fall into the wrong hands when all you need to do at the checkout counter is plant your thumb on the scanner? Now you can buy stuff faster than ever!

Before long, the Department of Motor Vehicles will want to get into the act. Then doctors and hospitals will have patients zipping through check-in, dispensing with all that tiresome paperwork. All you will ever need is your thumb. You won’t even have to be conscious. Heck, you won’t even have to be there. Just your thumb. Parents could have detachable thumbs. “Hey, Dad, I’m driving into Chicago today. Can I borrow the thumb?” “Okay, son. Just have it back by midnight.”

Our entire identity will be defined by our thumbs. Our thumbs will represent our legal status, our financial stature, our health, our political leanings, our religious affiliations, our intrinsic worth as neighbors and citizens. Our very soul.

We will no longer be able take our thumbs for granted. We’ll have to take special care of them. If you get a scar on your thumb from peeling potatoes, it might alter your identity. “I’m sorry, Ma’am. We cannot allow you to pick up the boy you say is your son from baseball practice. According to your thumbprint, it says you are a 78-year-old Tibetan man who had his license revoked for running over a goat.”

With all our personal information stored with our thumbprint, identity theft can be surprisingly easy. Investigators found that thumbprints leave a mark on the scanner and can be made to reappear by merely breathing on the glass. We can no longer afford to expose our naked thumbs to strangers who might photograph them or lift our prints from doorknobs. We’ll have to wear special thumb lingerie to hide our most intimate secrets from prying eyes.

Sure, it will take some adjustment. But sailing through the checkout line at Wal-Mart will make it all worthwhile.