Orlando school scanners put on hold

Whist schools are rolling out fingerprint systems in the UK, over in the USA it's also being brought in on a massive scale.

What is it with educationalists that makes them think it is acceptable to take a child's biometric data without even informing parents that they are going to do it. The same railroading tactics to finger scan the next generation are happening in the States as it is here in the UK.

If biometric technology is so great why not ask parents permission before their children's biometrics are taken and stored on a relatively insecure school computer?

Schools in Orlando didn't ask parents:

"Superintendent Bill Vogel said he had "indefinitely" delayed installation of finger scanners in lunchrooms at Hagerty High in Oviedo and Millennium Middle in Sanford. Officials say they jumped the gun by starting the scanning program without notifying parents or giving them a choice whether to have their children participate."

"There was not a letter sent out," Vogel said." - Why not? Here in the UK we have to sign permission slips for photographs taken, schools trips, food tasting, off site walks... why not biometric scans?

"I don't want to hear about this being a secure system or that it won't be used for anything else. No one can guarantee this," said Lisa Reese-Gordon in an e-mail complaint to Gov. Charlie Crist and school-district officials.

Look to recent law in Illinois, SB1702, which came into effect Aug this year states in section 5(B), page 4:

(5) A prohibition on the sale, lease, or other disclosure of biometric information to another person or entity, unless: (B) the disclosure is required by court order.

This could be law enforcement or government agencies.

Reese-Gordon, whose daughter attends Hagerty High, said there is"no educational purpose for the taking of fingerprints from children."

She's absolutely right. Biometric systems are purely used for administration purposes. Here in the UK children are the main proportion of the population using biometric systems.

If biometric systems are so time and cost effective why not use them routinely on the adult population? Why not in hospitals, civic centre, production lines, adult libraries, loyalties in stores, cash card authentication?

Why? Because adults question. In order for biometric systems to be efficient a large percentage take up of users would have to happen. But because we adults would question their use, who has access, how secure, etc. potential take up would be low and therefore not viable.

Children don't question, however parents would if we were asked - so we're not asked.

A bit of cancer with your chips?...but only with a fingerprint

Rantings of a New Yorker has had a few comments to make recently on the new fingerprint and RFID chipped world that our children experience in school:

RFID Chips Wanted in British School Children’s Uniforms
There’s a New Jacket in Town, and It’s Keeping Track of Your Children
Parents Upset at Scanning Children’s Fingerprints so They Can Eat Lunch

Ooooh and here's one that parents and pupils of Hungerhill School, Doncaster, UK might want to read - RFID Implants Linked to Cancer

Thanks Rantings and Slashdot too :)

Leeds pupils speak out

Over on Taz's blog the ongoing annoyance and concerns of pupils and parents at Morley High School, run by Education Leeds, continues, with much debate...

"i am a student at morley high school and now see why no letters were sent out, the ironic thing about this system is that in our school it dosent even work as expected because if multiple students use there fingerprints at the same time the orders get mixed up and so many people have to pay for things they havent even purchased ...and the head teacher is reported to be one of the best in the local area" mmm.... in some peoples views maybe not so "best"

Such systems can cost up to £25,000. When biometric systems do not educationally benefit children (depending from who's point of view), just think how better this 25K and the annual running costs of the system could be better spent on our children's education.

Outraged parents start their own blog

A while ago I posted Leeds pupils bullied to give up their prints - here is the email in full on the Leave Them Kids Alone site. It makes for uncomfortable reading.

So now the parents whose children go to Morley High School in Leeds have started their own blog, http://morleyparents.blogspot.com/.

Here they voice their concerns on how the new biometric fingerprint system has been implemented allegedly leaving pupils who refuse to be fingerprinted without hot meals and children who don't use the canteen being photographed fingerprinted - read the blog for more.

Technology for technologys sake

Okay, biometrics for vending machines, meals, entry and exit at school, libraries (and in the states school transport) now a school in Ilkley, Leeds, has a fingerprint cash paying in machine, for childrens school trips, that has set the school back £2500.

"The organisation of trips at Ilkley Grammar involves a turnover of £250,000 a year, mostly collected in £10 or £15 instalments. It means close to 20,000 transactions a year."

A quarter of a million pounds of parents money on school trips each year for around 1500 students (works out around £170 per pupil per year) suggests that Ilkely is a fairly affluent area and that the need for parents to pay in such small amounts could be managed better by the school.

"Head teacher Gillian James said in an explanatory letter to parents that the system would store a number based on a fingerprint reading. No fingerprint images would be stored". - Not exactly true, what is stored is an fingerprint algorithmic image that our UK police can access and use without parents and pupils knowledge (Deputy Information Commissioner Q50 & Q51).

I wish teachers would stop spouting the vendors and the governments "It's not a fingerprint...." speil and educate themselves.

Apparently - "The Information Commissioner and the Department of Education and Skills had said they had no concerns.", however these people do:

Kim Cameron, Microsoft's Identity Architect
Andrew Clymer, senior identity management security expert (more than 8 years at Cisco Systems, working with Visa, Fidelity, Merrill Lynch, etc - providing them with a secure network environment)
Paul Squires, Identity Solutions Architect at Enline plc
Bruce Schneier, a respected US writer and lecturer on issues surrounding security and privacy, who has testified before Congress and authored eight books and dozens of articles and academic papers.
Ralf Bendrath, privacy, security and internet researcher
Dr Sandra Leaton Gray, Director of Studies, Sociology of Education, Homerton College, Cambridge
Professor Emerita Leone Burton, University of Birmingham, visiting research fellow, Cambridge University
Patricia Deubel, PhD, adjunct faculty member in the graduate School of Education at Capella University
Dr James Atherton, learningandteaching.info
Jon Crowcroft, Marconi Professor of Communications Systems, University of Cambridge
Terrance Boult, University of Colorado
Eugene Schultz, Ph.D., CISM, CISSP, CTO of High Tower Software
David French , 30 plus years in IT, Wellington NZ
Brian Drury, IT security consultant, UK
Brian Honan, independent security consultant based in Dublin, Ireland
Dom Devitto, information Security consultant, UK
Rufus Evison MA (Cantab), senior IT consultant and company director, UK
An unnamed Police Fingerprint Officer (15+ years' experience)
Stephen Groesz, a partner with the law firm Bindmans
The Austrian Supreme Court
The States of Michigan, Illinios and Iowa (so far, others are likely to follow)
Tony Delaney, The Assistant Irish Data Protection Commissioner
Roderick Woo, Justice of the Peace at the Hong Kong Office of the Privacy Commissioner
George Radwanski, Privacy Commissioner of Canada
Ann Cavoukian, The Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
Damian Green MP, Conservative Home Affairs spokesman
The Rt Hon David Davis MP, Conservative Shadow Home Secretary
Nick Gibb MP, Conservative Shadow Minister For Schools
Baroness Carnegy, Conservative
Sarah Teather MP, LibDem Shadow Education Secretary
Greg Mulholland MP, Lib Dem Schools spokesperson
Baroness Walmsley, LibDem
Baroness Howe, Crossbencher
83 other MPs from all parties who have signed Early Day Motion 686 (frontbenchers do not usually sign EDMs)
More than 1500 parents who voted last summer in an online poll against kiddyprinting without parental consent. 93% opposed fingerprinting without consent.

Parents voice their concerns

The Daily Mail reports today on growing concerns amongst parents about the practise of "fingerprinting" children in schools for food, books and access.

One parent has already taken legal advice after his child's school took biometric fingerprint from his child without even informing him.

"...a Suffolk filmmaker called Jonathan Adams, are considering legal action to stop schools in their tracks. "Litigation may be the only way forward," he says. "We fear they are in breach of the Human Rights Act, the Data Protection Act and the European Commission laws that safeguard the child.

"We have sought initial advice from lawyers."

This from David Clouter of Leave Them Kids Alone, (which as a parent I completely agree with),
"Schools send out consent slips for just about anything, from allowing popcorn during cinema trips to whether we can take pictures of the school play at the end of term," Mr Clouter says, "but they didn't plan to ask the parents about taking their children's fingerprints."

Fiona Elliot a parent in Doncaster, who was quoted in the article, had this letter from her children's primary schools which stated: " We have no legal requirement to ask for permission [from parents before 'fingerprinting' children] as we will not be breaching any data protection regulations"

...and the next sentance is quite unbelievable, "and also letters of permission are not always returned" (!)

I agree with Fiona, "If some choose to write this off as alarmist, she doesn't care", neither do I.

Children's biometric data secure for their lifetime?

Over on Andy Clymer's blog he raises concerns of how children's biometric in schools may not be secure, even for their time at school.

"...a responsible biometric manufacture would secure biometric data as best they can today, but once the software has been deployed if that data is to be truly secure it needs have sufficient physical security measures in place provided by the owner to ensure that in the future the encryption based solution still has adequate merits, the moment you do not have complete ownership of the data all bets are off...and by their own admission the biometric provider in this case said their guarantees is for appx. 10 years, in the case of biometric data for kids that data is sensitive for 60-70 years."

Building Schools for the Future bidder builds biometric technology into schools

The Sunday Heralds reports that after the palm vein scanner was trailed in a Scottish primary school last October, Amey who introduced the vein scanner, developed by Yarg Biometrics and Fujutsu, have plans to introduce this in another 11 schools for lunch lines and possible entry into schools:

"The private firm Amey is now presenting biometric systems as part of its pitch for all new school building contracts. The company was keen to assure parents in Renfrewshire, where 11 more schools are set to adopt palm readers, that the technology was safe and data could not be stolen or misused."

Vein scanning is mildly more acceptable than fingerprint scanners, as a vein print cannot be casually left at a location as a fingerprint can and so implicate you at a certain location (other than at a vein scanner). But Amey's claim that the technology is safe and data cannot be misused or stolen is a very grand claim, as these children's biometric data needs to be secure for the rest of their life time - decades... or at the very least for the life time of a child's schooling from 4-18 years old, until 2021.

How can parents, governors and pupils be consulted on this if building these biometric systems into schools are done at local government contract level? And "opt out" alternatives should be provided.

The government (BECTA) guidelines state that, "...schools should normally involve pupils and parents in their decisions to use biometric technologies as is the case with other decisions made during the school life of children ." page 7 of the "BECTA guidance on biometric technologies in schools"

- this Building Schools for the Future(BSF)/Private Finance Initiative (PFI) scenario seems to blatantly override the recent government guidelines here, unless there is a consultation process underway with parents and pupils that hasn't been reported in this case.

If their is no "involvement" with parents and pupils, there is no consequence for the companies/schools installing it. Well, hey ho, that's non legal/statutory guidance for you.

Biometric systems help visibly reduce wrinkle lines and bullying

At Viewlands Primary, Perth, Scotland, a fingerprint scanning system is trialled for school lunches:

...a spokesman for the council insisted fingerprinting youngsters is safe and has helped reduce bullying. - the council spokesperson shows no evidence to back this statement up. In fact there is no evidence whatsoever that proves that using biometric systems in schools reduces bullying.

The spokesman claimed 90 per cent of parents had given permission for their children to take part and it was impossible for the system to be accessed by "unauthorised" users.

"Impossible"?... a fantastical claim to be made in this day and age when peoples identities are being stolen from cash point machines, NHS records stolen - re-surfacing on e-bay and banks not disposing of customers details properly.

Police able to access primary school fingerprint system

The Highland News reports that Drakies Primary School in Inverness, Scotland, has spent £1000 on fingerprint scanners for their school library.

The below comment is, as far as I know, the first mention in the media of police having accessing school fingerprint databases. Police can use children's biometric databases in England and Wales without informing parents. It does state here that the police have to get permission from the school and parents, Scottish law is different to English and Welsh law so this may well be the case in Scotland - but not in England and Wales (see questions 50 and 51).

... a spokeswoman for the National Policing Improvement Agency said: "If the police have reason to suspect a child has committed a crime then as part of their investigation with permission of the school and the parent, the police can request access to the data if they have reason to believe it will help them with their investigation."

There is no relevance to the argument that fingerprints aren't stored - a biometric identifier is stored which carries the exact same implications as if a fingerprint was stored.

Leeds pupils bullied to give up their prints

A parent from Leeds forwarded both myself and Leave Them Kids Alone details of how their 11 year old son's new school dealt with her concerns over a biometric lunch system, installed over the summer break.

The vendors of the lunch system treated the children without respect, the schools evaded questions, she got told by the bio-company "It is the law, it was passed in parliament in June this year. If you don't believe me, I can prove it" (what?!) and some courageous pupils refused on human rights grounds - good for them!

The email in full is on the LTKA [link temporarily removed] site, but here are some parts of the email that, quite frankly, makes my blood boil in the way the children were treated - but yet an admirable response in their stanse:

(parent) ...I had a telephone conversation with a very bright young girl who also attends this school. She refused to have her fingerprints taken, as did her friend. (Their human rights decision - she said) They have also heard of a few others who have refused too. They didn't agree with the way that the system had been sneaked into school and with no parental consent form. They were very scared, yet refused to cooperate. They were then threatened with the isolation unit, no school trips and wouldn't be allowed to enter into the school without the prints.

But.... my point is, they still refused! The girl said that many of her friends were very scared, they didn't like it and didn't want to have it done, yet they were still bullied into it (........ including her younger brother)

She said that they rounded up the kids like sheep for the slaughter, doing all the youngest first. The teenagers who are in their final year of school are going to be fingerprinted tomorrow. (14/09/2007) She also mentioned that apart from the science teachers, all the other teachers were completely in the dark about what was going on.

Courageous kids eh? bless em :-)

And this cashless system is supposed to 'prevent 'bullying eh?... the schools implementation of this scheme, in itself, raises some very serious questions!

Schools right to fingerprint without consent?

Chris Woodhead, who was the Chief Inspector of Schools in England from 1994 until 2000, answers this parent query on the Times Online website.

My 15-year-old son’s school recently informed parents that it would be introducing technology which uses pupils’ fingerprints to pay for school dinners. The school say they want to discourage children from bringing cash into school. How is that schools can keep this sort of personal information that could lead to identity theft? Where do parents stand in demanding their child’s fingerprints be removed from the system? Fiona Byrne, Leicestershire

The school has no right to fingerprint your son without your consent. You can therefore demand that his fingerprints are removed from its records.

I worry that our children will come to assume that those in authority have a right to demand any information they desire.

Although schools may not have the right morally, schools, with the support of the Labour Government Education Dept, are being told that they are operating within the law which enables tham to 'fingerprint' children without informing parents - until this assumed right is tested in a court of law.

Superglueing fingers

A friend sent me this from Klei's site.