Should We Be Concerned About Biometrics?

Referencing Article:http://www.eff.org/wp/biometrics-whos-watching-you

"Why be concerned about biometrics? Proponents argue that:

A) biometrics themselves aren't dangerous because all the real dangers are associated with the database behind the biometric information, which is little different from problems of person-identifying information (PII) databases generally;

B) biometrics actually promote privacy, e.g., by enabling more reliable identification and thus frustrating identity fraud.

But biometric systems have many components. Only by analyzing a system as a whole can one understand its costs and benefits. Moreover, we must understand the unspoken commitments any such system imposes (EFF Sep 2003)."

I read this and was moved by the idea that a system that could have significant implications on personal identification data is being prematurely recommended for broad based deployment without significant analysis of its advantages and disadvantages.

The advantages of biometrics seem to create a false sense of security I believe in part because we have relied on them for so long in other applications. Biometrics have been used in law enforcement where we fingerprint criminals and maintain that information in records to possibly identify repeat offenders, update current records with new information about individuals, or for use in otherwise pertinent applications. As far as I know, fingerprints have been very reliable in identifying individuals and solving criminal cases and now with the advancement in forensic science we are able to use DNA and DNA databases to close cases that would otherwise be deemed cold or open indefinitely. This biometric data has also been very useful in exonerating the falsely accused and getting justice for these individuals and their families.

It seems simple enough that we could rely on "bio" samples unique to each individual to perform check constraints against "live" samples in biometric databases (EFF Sep 2003). Yet, I have to wonder what would happen in the case of individuals who share similar DNA characteristics particularly in the case of twins, parents, other siblings, and family members. Now, the argument could be made that each individual's fingerprints are unique, but what about in the case of scanning faces and other body parts for personal identification? I have lost count of the number of times someone has mistaken me, my mother, and or my sister for someone else. Most of the times it was because we look so much like other members of our family, which is to be expected, when someone just glances at your face and recalls a familiar image. I can see this also being a potential problem for a database system as well. The possibility for potential errors seem to exceed the scope of biometrics particularly when you factor in identical twins. I am just curious to know how we could prevent mistakes in that instance. These are just one or two potential disadvantages of biometrics. Obviously, we need to rethink early adoption of these systems as primary tools for personal identification.

I agree with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in that we need a realistic model to build the most efficient biometric systems before we can implement this technology instead of promoting it as a cure all solution for personal identification and the most accurate way to combat crimes that rely on biometric resolutions. We do not know enough about the impacts of relying too heavily on such systems. It is very easy to allow the pros to outweigh the cons when we approach advancements in technology. It is almost like kids who are easily persuaded by the promotion of all these innovative and technologically advanced toys or gadgets so they easily adopt them via persuading their parents of the surface benefits. For example, the continuous stream of video games and cell phones that saturate the market. We do not realize that with the early adoption of these systems and gadgets that we ultimately pay the price of systems and phones that become outdated almost the moment we buy them or poor behaviors that result of not understanding the full extent of product adoption (e.g. laziness on the behalf of children who would rather sit and play games all day instead of being active or excessive text messaging that leave us paying exorbitant fees associated with cell phone bills). We may get more than we bargained for if we act prematurely in the adoption of new technologies instead of thinking things through before we act.

It all comes down to asking ourselves the question of whether we should be concerned about biometrics, gathering data about that question, and evaluating and analyzing that data before we rush into deploy a system that may do more harm than its proposed good.