From: dichro@yodel.iinet.net.au (Mikolaj J. Habryn)
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 14:42:55 +0800
To: decius@ninja.techwood.org (Decius 6i5)
Subject: Re: New Chip Verifies Fingerprints (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <m0wUlwu-00001AC@r42h17.res.gatech.edu>
Message-ID: <m3n2pm4snq.fsf@yodel.iinet.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>>>>> "D6" == Decius 6i5 <decius@ninja.techwood.org> writes:

    D6> If I get mugged and the mugger wants access to my bank account
    D6> all he has to do is chop off the relevant finger. Don't
    D6> laugh. This *WILL* happen.  Biometrics create an general
    D6> economic incentive for maiming or murdering people.

  Not to detract from your philosophical point, but I saw a
demonstration of a similar device over six years ago which not only
sampled the fingerprint pattern, but also the blood vessels beneath
the skin and blood flow patterns. The intent was, obviously, to
increase the difficulty level of creating a synthetic replacement, but
an (incidental?) advantage is that cutting off the finger in question
and presenting it without a blood supply would not work. While it is
still feasible to attach artificial blood pumping mechanisms etc, it
is no longer a $20 equipment budget.

    D6> I will take you one further... *When you implement a biometric
    D6> system you are deciding that the value of that which is being
    D6> protected is greater than the value of the lives of the people
    D6> who have access to it.*

  Once again, this assumes that the biometric system does not require
a living breathing subject to work upon. This is not necessarily a
valid assumption. Whilst the simpler systems may indeed be fooled
(although that is perhaps not the best term) by morbid samples, it is
certainly feasible to require living tissue.

  The remainder of your argument, which I shan't quote, likewise
revolves around the assertion that killing someone will always gain
you the access you desire. This is untrue. If you wish to push this
further, you could add stress analysis features to catch people
operating under coercion, and quick blood sampling to catch those
drugged into placidity who would otherwise be stressed (and
incidentally, any substance abuse that you might be interested in).

    D6> One additional point. The possibilities for surveilance
    D6> inherent in biometrics are fearsome. If I managed to compile a
    D6> large database of people's names, social security numbers, and
    D6> face prints; I could set up a closed circuit camera system in
    D6> my store which would provide me with the name, home address,
    D6> credit, and other information about every person who enters my
    D6> business, AUTOMATICALLY, without the customers even being
    D6> cognisant that this is going on. The marketing people will be
    D6> going nutz over this possibility. I'm going to the drug store
    D6> for some Pepto...

  Now, this /is/ an important concern. However, there's little way
around it. Authentication revolves around, in most cases, a high
assurance of the identity of something. The technique of
authentication is less of a concern than the possibilities of linking
diverse records together into a single database - and that is a more
interesting problem to try to solve.

m.