Loss of Privacy

After years of ignoring their illegal immigration problems, the EU has finally decided to copy America’s border security measures by fingerprinting all entries and exits from all visitors to the EU.

The measures would ensure more secure borders and prevent visitors from illegally entering Europe, or overstaying the three-month stay given to tourists and EU visa holders, Franco Frattini said.

And how does the EU propose to do this?  At best, they can state that a person has overstayed their visit.  Good luck actually finding the person.

“The electronic register should include viable biometric identifiers,” Frattini told reporters during two-day talks of EU justice and interior ministers. He said visitors overstaying their welcome were “the No. 1″ cause of illegal immigration.

Uh, duh?!  What a great insight.  Illegals come from people overstaying their welcome.    Also, by requiring biometrics, the database they store them in will not be guaranteed safe and a country could circumvent their own laws by asking the EU for a copy of their database.

In reality, what this plan is, is a clear cut case of retaliation against the United States for its actions against EU allies.  It is also frightening in its possible privacy violations.

Such a data system, modeled after one adopted by the U.S., would store 19 pieces of sensitive passenger data for 13 years, including e-mail addresses, telephone numbers and payment details of flight tickets.

Nice.  More databases.  Less security.  More harassment.  On the upside, maybe I’ll get some entertaining telemarketing calls from The Netherlands now.

Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling have tried to convince the British public that, had the 25 million records recently lost been protected with biometric ID cards, the information contained within would have somehow been protected.

The letter points out that this is based on three suppositions – that the entire UK population can be enrolled on the database; that no one can forge biometric information; and finally that every ID check would include checks against biometric information on the national database.

Several leading academics felt compelled to write the Home Office to explain how ridiculous this claim is.

Even if, in this fairy-tale land, it came to pass that (a) (b) and (c) were true after all (which we consider most unlikely), the proposed roll-out of the National Identity Scheme would mean that this level of ‘protection’ would not – on the Home Office’s own highly optimistic projections – be extended to the entire population before the end of the next decade (i.e. 2020) at the earliest.

They also pointed out that, if so much information were to be cataloged in one place, it would be even more valuable to thieves and more likely a target by crooks.

In an effort to control illegal immigration, Senator Lindsey Graham wants to recreate all Social Security cards with plastic, biometric ones that, supposedly, can’t be duplicated, thus assuring employers that their workers are legal. Apparently, Senator Graham forgot that he just voted for the the recently failed amnesty bill, thus making a 360 on his stance on immigration.

The only problem with this is that it penalizes those of us who have not committed a crime by placing our personal, biometric data into yet another database, where our identity will become just a little more insecure.

America needs a legal guest worker program to fill jobs citizens don’t want, but the U.S. must control who enters the country for national security, he said.

Employers need a system they can rely on to determine the legal status of potential workers, so Graham said he plans to introduce a bill this fall to replace all Social Security cards over the next 10 years at a cost of $8 billion to $10 billion. The new cards would be tamperproof.

First of all, NOTHING is tamperproof. Secondly, Graham intends to shove this biometric card at us and make us pay for it. Senator Graham can kiss my ass!

We already have a program that checks the identities of the people applying for jobs. Thousands of employers have already signed up for the program.

Until all Americans have a secure form of identification, the best worker identification tool is a voluntary federal program used by 19,000 employers so far, Chertoff said. The computerized system verifies that the name, age, and Social Security workers give to employers match, he said.

This program already works. Nearly all the high profile illegal workers busted in the last year were as a direct result of this program. So, tell me again, why do I have to have a leash shoved up my ass?

Chertoff acknowledged the system, which would have been mandatory under the comprehensive immigration reform, has flaws. Though it will catch workers who supply fake Social Security numbers, it won’t catch those who use stolen identities, he said.

Oh that’s right, I need this idiotic biometric card because all identity thieves are illegal immigrants. Graham also wants to keep his name out there because he fears that he won’t be re-elected, which he probably won’t be. Since he won’t be getting the Hispanic vote due to the amnesty bill failing, he’s going to the other side, in hopes of some votes.

Graham said he understands state lawmakers opposition to the federal 2005 REAL ID Act. South Carolina is among states that rejected the unfunded federal mandate for new national driver’s license standards, estimated to cost states $11 billion to implement.

“A driver’s license is not the way to solve the problem,” he said.

So, your state rejected REAL-ID, but you want a biometric Social Security card that will contain essentially the same data? Your plan also allows for all sorts of ID to be used to get this card, thus eliminating the so-called security that you’re searching for. Senator Graham, do you even listen to yourself when you speak?

America’s public schools are again attempting to indoctrinate young children into believing that technology, such as biometrics, are a the answer to their security needs. Elementary schools are now in the picture because biometric technology has advanced enough that the scanners read a fingerprint as small as that of a four year old.

In Rome, Georgia, the West End Elementary School is using fingerprint readers in the cafeteria. Children line up, grab their food and pay with their index fingers. There are school districts across the country that also use biometrics for purposes other than paying for lunch. School nurses use it for dispensing medication. It’s also used for attendance, library privileges, and at school bus stops.

Administrators informed parents that the prints are not stored by the system or accessible to the Internet. If they are not stored by the system, then how do they identify that little Johnny’s index finger is really his? Surely, there is some storage to match the prints to. How else are they charging the students for their meals? That’s right, they are recording unique points of a person’s fingerprint instead of the whole print, which means that your identifying marks are being stored.

The school is bragging that the lunch lines have been cut in half. What they aren’t telling you is that your child’s fingerprint must be stored somewhere to be identified. Nor are they telling you how easy it is to fake a print or what happens when the database is stolen.

In New Egypt, New Jersey, three Plumsted Township schools have adopted the using of iris scanning cameras to check and see if anyone not pre-authorized to enter the school is on the premises. New Egypt, however, only has 1,700 in its entire school district. That’s smaller than most high schools in America. They wanted a better security system than the swipe cards they were using and chose iris scanning. However, with 1,700 children, spread across three schools, iris scanning isn’t the best solution. If the school monitors, teachers, teacher’s aides, counselors, and principals are doing their jobs, it’s easy to identify who isn’t supposed to be there. This school district is relying on technology they don’t need to solve a problem they don’t have.

However, school officials believe that they are allaying concerns of safety and security at their schools with this system. After scanning staff, students, and parents, they still only had a 78% accuracy rate. Outdoor lighting, cameras freezing up or misidentifying people, and people not lining up properly were the most common problems to failure of the system. If the technology cannot be properly used, then it becomes a liability to the safety you are supposedly creating and you still need an actual person to identify the person attempting to enter the building. What was the biggest problem to all this new technology for the school? Once someone had scanned their iris, they held the door open for other people.

Biometrics give parents a feeling of safety and security but it’s not guaranteed. School districts who so readily accept biometrics without proper education are leading children to believe that these systems are infallible. It still does not address the fact that the most prevelant crimes in schools are petty crimes committed by the very people that are supposed to be there.

Most parents who have objected to the implementation in Rome’s schools complain about the lack of communication and transparency given to them. One particular parent complained that he was never informed before his daughter’s print was scanned. His major concern is identity theft and that his daughter had to rely on assurances that the system would never be used for evil purposes.

In Penn Cambria schools in Pennsylvania, school officials assure that the prints are stored as a mathematical formula and can never be turned back into a print. They also claim that the database can never be read by law enforcement for identity purposes. This is, quite frankly, lying to the people. If there is a court order, they will be turning over their database.

Officials also said it was great for parents who couldn’t keep track of prepaid meal tickets who couldn’t do simple math to remember when the tickets were used and had to be loaded with money again. Uh, just how is a fingerprint scanner going to change that? Or are lunches now magically free because you gave up your print?

Biometrics themselves are not evil. They are a great way to perform many tasks faster and more efficiently. Cash and cards can be stolen. You always have your eyes or fingerprints with you. However, the technology is not perfect and doesn’t work 100% of the time. Problems also arise when people are not fully informed on the systems in use, lied to, do not know how to use the systems, don’t understand the system, and circumvent the system (such as holding the door open).

A google search will turn up many results to ponder on the usefulness of biometrics in schools. Right now, biometrics simply are not mature enough to be in such widespread use in the public school system. They don’t work, schools are no place to be setting up shop as faux police checkpoints, and the loss of privacy has not been properly debated. What happens when someone hacks the system and steals this data? Some schools require teachers to have their home address and social security numbers tagged into this information. School officials are not experts in the field and cannot be expected to understand everything about it.

We must question why the mere thought of RFID sends shivers up people’s spines, yet biometrics gets a pass, as if it’s a proven technology that works every time. Right now, these systems are just high-tech spying programs that do not really protect the people it claims to be serving. Biometrics can be useful but low-level security areas, such as elementary schools, are not the place to test them. It creates a false sense of security and teaches children that technology is the be all to end all solution to keeping them safe.