Quantum surveillance and 'shared secrets'. A biometric step too far? CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe, July 2010

It is no longer sensible to regard biometrics as having neutral socio-economic, legal and political impacts. Newer generation biometrics are fluid and include behavioural and emotional data that can be combined with other data. Therefore, a range of issues needs to be reviewed in light of the increasing privatisation of ‘security’ that escapes effective, democratic parliamentary and regulatory control and oversight at national, international and EU levels, argues Juliet Lodge, Professor and co-Director of the Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence at the University of Leeds, U

Privacy Concerns Regarding the Use of Biometrics in Trusted Traveler Programs

One of the objectives of the U.S. government is to balance the individual’s right to privacy and national security interests. Trusted Traveler programs create a risk-based security model where the traveling public is categorized into low or high risk. There are, however, some privacy concerns related to the acceptance of the use of biometric technology in the adoption of expedited security screening procedures in commercial airports. The theoretical construct of this case study of the TSA Pre-Check Program is based on Ajzen and Fischbein’s theory of reasoned action, specifically through Davis’ technology acceptance model. The purpose of this case study was to explore the perceptions of the traveling public regarding the protection of privacy and the use of biometric technologies. Data for this study included 325 social media postings, 50 privacy complaints reported to the Department of Homeland Security between 2009 and 2014, and publicly available data from the Government Accountability Office about expedited screening for the years 2011 – 2014. Data were coded into a priori themes and then subjected to a content analysis procedure. Findings indicate that the traveling public generally support expedited security screening and consent to waiving certain privacy rights in order to facilitate expedited screening. Complaints from travelers were also primarily related to wait times and secondary screening, and not privacy concerns. The positive social change implications stemming from this study include recommendations to the TSA to expand the Trusted Traveler programs such that the primary concern of the traveling public, reduction of wait time is balanced against privacy concerns about the collection of biometric data as part of a measured response to aviation security

The Case for National DNA Identification Cards

Foes of the United States have demonstrated their ability to strike at the heart of this country. Fear of renewed attacks and a desire for greater national security have now prompted many to call for improvements in the national personal identification system. In particular, the possibility of a national identification card containing the carrier\u27s DNA information is being seriously considered. However, this raises difficult questions. Would such a card system, and the extraction of individuals\u27 DNA it entails, violate the 4th Amendment of the Constitution? This article will show that such a card system could in fact be found to be constitutional under the law of privacy as it stands today

Facebook or Face Bank?

On June 7, 2011, social media giant Facebook Inc. debuted its facial recognition tool to all of its users. The facial recognition tool has the capability of identifying individuals automatically in photographs uploaded to Facebook by its users. Soon thereafter, the facial recognition tool prompted privacy concerns and ultimately led to a complaint being filed with the Federal Trade Commission. While at first denying its use of facial recognition technology, Facebook eventually admitted to its use of the technology. However, Facebook failed to acknowledge that it collected and stored the biometric data—data that is considered highly sensitive—of all of its users without their consent. Accordingly, Facebook violated the privacy rights of its users when it covertly collected and stored the data. Although it may be possible for users to bring a private action against Facebook for privacy violations, they would, nevertheless, be confronted with a tremendous roadblock—the issue of standing. Without the ability to legally protect their data, Facebook users are left with little recourse. Accordingly, the United States Government and courts must heighten privacy protections of personalized information, such as biometric data, to prevent companies like Facebook from usurping highly sensitive personalized data of their users