Biometric Technology Dissenters: Alex Feinberg Brad Harris Ashley DiSilvestro Charisma Nelson

Biometrics are convenient until they are stolen.

Cost for Biometric Technology: Prohibitively High Many expected biometric technology to be widespread by the mid 1990’s, but even in 2007 it is still unpopular because it remains too expensive to implement. -Katy Lieber, “Identifying the market for biometrics” East Bay Business Times, January 23, 2006 “Iris recognition units--typically used to authorize physical access to a place--cost about $2,000 per unit. Hand geometry readers usually cost between $2,000 and $4,000. Putting together a comprehensive iris or hand recognition system, for example, would cost far more, on the order of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and involves hardware, software, and licensing costs.” -Paul Rosenzweig, Alane Kochems, and Ari Schwartz: “Biometric Technologies: Security, Legal, and Policy Implications” The Heritage Foundation, June 21, 2004

Just imagine if one hospital or one university, with all of its access points, sought to implement iris or hand recognition biometric technology… it would cost MILLIONS of dollars. Now imagine biometric technology being installed at sites across the country! The initial investment of converting security systems nation-wide to biometric would be on the order of many billions of dollars. We are not just talking about little scanners over doorways, we are talking about the design and construction of an entirely new infrastructure that would rely on sophisticated and expensive hardware technology and computer software. Who is going to pay for this? Private business? What about businesses that cannot afford the technology overhaul?

Rebuttal: SECURITY Biometrics Technology is NOT a foolproof security system. If traditional security methods (identity cards, passwords, etc) still needed, what is the point??? Biometrics are not foolproof; it may be more convenient in the future, but may not be more secure.

Malaysia car thieves steal finger By Jonathan Kent BBC News, Kuala Lumpur Police in Malaysia are hunting for members of a violent gang who chopped off a car owner's finger to get round the vehicle's hi-tech security system. The car, a Mercedes S-class, was protected by a fingerprint recognition system. Accountant K Kumaran's ordeal began when he was run down by four men in a small car as he was about to get into his Mercedes in a Kuala Lumpur suburb. The gang, armed with long machetes, demanded the keys to his car. It is worth around $75,000 second-hand on the local market, where prices are high because of import duties. Stripped naked The attackers forced Mr Kumaran to put his finger on the security panel to start the vehicle, bundled him into the back seat and drove off. But having stripped the car, the thieves became frustrated when they wanted to restart it. They found they again could not bypass the immobiliser, which needs the owner's fingerprint to disarm it. They stripped Mr Kumaran naked and left him by the side of the road - but not before cutting off the end of his index finger with a machete. Police believe the gang is responsible for a series of thefts in the area. Story from BBC NEWS: Published: 2005/03/31 10:37:04 GMT © BBC MMVII

What about false-positives and false-negatives? Can you distinguish these faces? A computer may not be able to False Positive = Incorrect match between identifiers of two different individuals  detaining an innocent person False Negative = Unsuccessful identification of a wanted individual  allows criminal to slip through During a recent test at the Palm Beach Airport in Florida, a biometric system produced a false positive more than twice an hour. It was able to identify the 15 employees who had volunteered to pose as terrorists on a watch list only 47 percent of the time (false negative). The airport announced it would not adopt the system. - Simson Garfinkel, International Biometric Group  ???

Violation of the Fourth Amendment of The U.S. Constitution The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Violates Article 12 of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 12: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

The Slippery Slope of Biometric Technology Biometrics is a good idea in theory BUT when put into practice, infringes upon individual’s right to privacy. Endless Possibilities for Exploitation and Abuse Will Cause more Harm than Good Poses Unacceptable Risk to Loss of Privacy & Personal Freedom Big Brother is Watching You: when does it end?