[iwar] [fc:Biometrics.and.the.new.security.age]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-11-26 06:17:14
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Information.security.spending.to.hit.$30.billion.by.2005]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:CERT.Summary.CS-2001-04]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Message-Id: <200111261417.fAQEHE824340@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 06:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Biometrics.and.the.new.security.age]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Biometrics and the new security age

By Ursula Owre Masterson, MSNBC, 11/21/01
<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/654788.asp">http://www.msnbc.com/news/654788.asp>

A nascent technology is rushed to the front line

The next time you fly through Boston, your eyes, nose and mouth may be
scrutinized - digitally cross-checked with the eyes, noses and mouths of
suspected terrorists. Starting this month, Logan International Airport
will try out two facial recognition systems designed to boost security
after two hijacked planes originating at the airport changed the course
of history.

EVEN BEFORE September's terrorist attacks put the nation on edge, a
controversial new security and surveillance technology known as
biometrics was emerging. Combine Star Trek's futuristic fantasies, James
Bond's sex appeal and a pinch of Orwellian paranoia, and you've got the
perfect recipe for biometrics, a technology that uses the human body as
a password, key or ID. 
Examples of the technology's early applications abound:  London's
Heathrow airport has started directing selected international passengers
to bypass immigration agents and instead look into a machine that
captures the unique pattern of the iris, translates it into 512 bytes of
binary data called an iris code and matches it to the passengers'
frequent flier numbers.  At Disney World in Florida, annual pass holders
breeze through the gates of the Magic Kingdom by placing their hand on a
scanner.  In Connecticut, the Department of Social Services stores the
digital fingerprints of welfare recipients to combat "double dipping"
fraud. Casinos across the country routinely use facial recognition
technology to snoop out known cheaters. A growing number of banks,
including Texas-based Bank United, the Bank of America and Wells Fargo,
are using biometric technology to improve the security of online banking
and replace PINs and bank cards at ATMs.

In the pre-9/11 world, a mere reference to biometrics raised the hackles
of privacy advocates, who said the word was synonymous with "Big
Brother."

Recently, however, such criticism has been muted considerably as many
Americans appear willing to trade some privacy for more security.
Despite the enormous costs of widespread implementation and lingering
disputes about the technology's accuracy, Americans seem ready to give
certain biometrics a try.  Advertisement

In a Harris Interactive poll conducted between Sept. 19 and 24, for
example, 86 percent of the respondents supported the use of facial
recognition technology to scan for suspected terrorists at key locations
and public events.

Sept. 11 prompted commissioners from 20 U.S. airports that together
handle 166.5 million passengers annually to meet and ask Congress for up
to $4 billion in annual reimbursement funding to offset the costs of
bolstering security - including installing biometric scanners in some
airports. "We now perceive aviation security as national security, "
said Stephen Van Beek of Airports Council International. Currently, only
a handful of airports around the globe  rely on biometric ID systems,
including Iceland's Keflavik Airport and Toronto's Pearson Airport.  But
the race is on to install more. In addition to Logan's tryout this
month, officials at San Francisco International, Oakland International
and Fresno airports have committed to installing some form of biometric
security devices.

Congress, too, is casting aside suspicions and embracing the technology.
During the past two months, representatives and senators alike have
introduced a flood of bills that recommend or mandate the use of
biometric technology in the war against terrorism. 
September 10 - Facial recognition technology developed by Viisage
technologies translates a person's facial features into a long string of
numbers that can be used to identify individuals electronically.
MSNBC.com's Ursula Owre Masterson reports.

Even before the September attacks, the federal government was buying
into biometrics. Last year, the U.S. Department of Defense received a
congressional mandate to set up an entire office devoted to researching
current biometric technologies. Now, at a special lab in West Virginia,
the Biometrics Management Office oversees the testing of hundreds of new
products, recommending ones it deems best at improving security
throughout the DoD, whether at the Pentagon or on the battlefield.
"Corporations and government agencies are turning increasingly to
biometrics for security," says Rick Norton, a spokesman for the
International Biometrics Industry Association, "because PINs and
passwords are notoriously corrupt, very easily compromised and expensive
to administer." And "unlike car keys, you always have your biometric
with you," says John Woodward, a senior analyst at Rand who studies
biometric policy issues. He says this "built-in" quality makes
biometrics more convenient and secure than any other method of
identification.

But while biometrics may offer the potential for greater security, civil
libertarians warn that the emerging technology can also be used
"passively" against us, and in places where terrorists are unlikely to
tread. "It's inevitable that once you install biometric technology in
airports, it will be used in more and more places" says Jay Stanley of
the American Civil Liberties Union. "Then we might just slip further
down the slippery slope to a surveillance society." Dr. Frank Askin, a
law professor and civil liberties expert at Rutgers University, also is
wary of the surge in biometrics' popularity. "When you have a lobby that
has an economic incentive in this, and when it's being fueled by
concerns about terrorism, there's always the potential for going
overboard," says Askin.

Even before terrorism concerns were paramount, video cameras equipped
with facial recognition technology were being used in several U.S. and
European pilot projects to scan streets for criminals. Such projects
still touch a nerve among those who maintain that, even in the name of
security, we shouldn't have our every move tracked or our most personal
information digitized and stored in databases. 
Then there's the issue of  the databases themselves. In  the wake of the
attacks, there  has been renewed talk of  issuing every U.S. citizen a national 
ID card, encrypted with  biometric information such as a digital fingerprint.  But 
any resulting  government database could be misused, according to  biometrics detractors. 
In a  recent op-ed article
for SF Gate's Tech Beat, Silicon Valley columnist Hal Plotkin reminds
readers that "our government officials have an already notorious track
record of harassing or targeting out-of-favor groups." Plotkin cites the
internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War II and Vietnam
War-era protesters audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

In answer to such complaints, some in the industry, like Visionics, a
New Jersey-based leader in facial recognition, have suggested specific
measures designed to uphold privacy rights and ensure that databases
don't get overloaded with images of average, law-abiding citizens. These
include a "no match-no memory" system that would insure no images are
kept by a system unless matched to a criminal. 
But for many, the "Big Brother" debate has lost some of its urgency. Back in January, 
after facial recognition was used at Super Bowl 35 to
scan crowds for criminals, civil libertarians were outraged. Some called
the game the "Snooper Bowl" and said the scans amounted to a "digital
line-up." Then U.S. Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, got involved. When police
in Tampa, Fla., used biometric technology on the streets of a popular
city neighborhood, Armey blasted the city's hi-tech surveillance and
asked for a General Accounting Office study on the source of funding for
such technologies. 
Today, however, such pre-September memories are fading, and Americans
have more to worry about than petty criminals showing up at ball games.
The prospect of foreign terrorists in our midst, committed to killing
themselves while murdering thousands of civilians, has prompted an
increased willingness to give up some personal information in exchange
for peace of mind. Perhaps not surprisingly, the biometrics industry is
one of the few beneficiaries of September's tragic events. A week after
the attacks, while other stocks were plummeting, Visionics didn't waste
a moment, sending an e-mail to reporters on the afternoon of the 11th
saying that its founder and CEO, Joseph Atick, "has been speaking
worldwide about the need for biometric systems to catch known terrorists
and wanted criminals." A week later, Atick testified at a meeting held
by Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta about the importance of facial
recognition as part of a new national security plan.



Still, it's unlikely - in the near future at least - that we're all
going to have our faces, fingers and eyes scanned every time we travel.
First, the costs of installing biometric tools and then integrating them
with centralized databases is enormous, not to mention time consuming. Second, as 
biometrics' detractors are always eager to point out, the
technology's accuracy is still debatable. The National Institute of
Standards and Technology cites Defense Department studies that showing
that, in some cases, lighting conditions and even the presence of
eyeglasses can throw off certain facial recognition programs. Third,
even industry insiders caution that biometric technology is not a
panacea for all of today's security woes. "Biometrics is a very
important additional tool," says Tom Colatosti, president and CEO of
Massachusetts-based Viisage Technologies, Visionics' leading competitor
in the field of facial recognition. "But we should still have the
titanium doors in cockpits, sniffing dogs and X-ray machines."  Then
Colatosti adds a final thought: "It's just that this technology could
make the most impact. After all, two of the hijackers on September 11th
were on an FBI watch list. If their faces had come up as a match, things
might have turned out differently."

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
Refill any ink cartridge for less!
Includes black and color ink.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XwUZwC/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Information.security.spending.to.hit.$30.billion.by.2005]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:CERT.Summary.CS-2001-04]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:59 PST