Biometric Technology Raises Privacy Concerns

Many privacy advocates are up in arms over biometric technology which uses a biometric or biometrics such as a retinal scan to authenticate an individual's identity before granting access to a building, computer network, or whatever the biometric security system is protecting. But it could just as easily be argued that biometrics are no different than other common items used for identity such as social security numbers and in many cases biometrics actually enhance identity protection.

I'll bet these privacy critics didn't realize the Department of Defense (DoD) had to study the privacy implications before implementing biometric technology due to many laws, policies, and regulation requiring the DoD to provide privacy protections.

In 1999, the DoD commissioned a complete study into the concerns raised about the use of biometric technology. The study was titled "Army Biometric Applications: Identifying & Addressing Sociocultural Concerns" and is freely available to the public. Some of the concerns raised included an individual's objection to the use of biometrics based on religious beliefs, the individuals ability to control information about themselves, and freedom from contact with other people or monitoring agents.

Function creep is the most significant privacy concern related to the use of biometrics for identification purposes. Function creep occurs when the original purpose for which information is gathered is expanded to include other purposes with or without the knowledge or agreement of the individual providing the information.

Identity theft and other misuses of confidential personal information has increasingly problematic with technological advances making such crimes easier to perpetrate. Critics are concerned that just as social security numbers are stolen and used to commit crimes, the same could be done with biometric information.

Biometric technology also raises physical privacy concerns such as the possibility of physical harm causes by biometric equipment like a retinal scan or repeated retinal scans. There is no factual data to give credence to these concerns. There are no known cases of biometrics causing physical injuries of any kind.

Religious objections to forced participation in government-mandated programs requiring biometrics have been successful in Connecticut and unsuccessful in New York so there have been conflicting rulings on this point.

The privacy concerns raised over the use of biometrics are no different than the privacy concerns raised of the use of many other pieces of information used to identify individuals. The privacy-enhancing aspects of biometric technology should not be overlooked. It's exceedingly more difficult to steal or counterfeit a biometric identifier than it is to do the same with passwords or security cards. Biometrics also don't require individuals to remember passwords or carry keys so in many ways the use of biometrics provides more convenience in addition to a higher level of security.

Also consider that biometric identifiers reveal little information about an individual unlike a driver's license which reveals all kinds of personal information such as name, address, height, weight, and possibly SSN and medical conditions. The biometric database contains an image whether it's a fingerprint, retinal scan or some other biometric information and nothing else. What good is a fingerprint if the thief doesn't even know the name of the person it belongs to?