[LINK] Airport to tag passengers

[Geoffrey Ramadan]

stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:
> At 09:23 AM 19/10/2006, Geoffrey Ramadan wrote:
>
>   
>>> what rights do prisoners have re RFID privacy?
>>> http://email.news.com.au/ct/click?q=bf-Jt4fQ8ZrssxZaGu5w1dA
>>>       
>> I would argue none..
>>
>> RFID is a more effective and safer way of doing what they are
>> already doing (which is being constantly monitored and restrained)
>>
>> RFID has also be used to return some freedoms and privileges t
>> prisoners via Home Detention.
>>     
>
> Geoff, you ask what issues aren't covered by: 
> http://www.privacy.gov.au/news/media/03_17.html
>
> Importantly .. anything to do with personal RFID tags is not covered.
>
> By that I mean, RFID-ing people, is not covered at all.
>   
Surely the principles outline cover this and are still applicable, 
regardless to who or what you attach it to.

 I don't think you want to restrict the guidelines to specific use of RFID.

> Agreed, a tag which allows remote prisoner-supervision sounds good. 
>
> But, does that imply that many / every security person who does
> not like a patron (eg David Hookes) can easily read any prisoner's
> family address after any altercation for revenge or even simply theft?
>   
I would have assumed all they want to do with the RFID is identify the 
Prisoner and track him. Not link it to any other personal data.

Also following the two guidelines:
"a)RFID tags should only be linked to personal information or used to 
profile customers if there is no other way of achieving the goal sought;
and
c)personal information collected using RFID tags should only be used for 
the specific purpose for which it is first collected and destroyed after 
that purpose is achieved, and;
Linking "

would mean that you would not link his data to any other data as this 
was not its purpose.



> Wouldn't the RFID supplier be liable for any family pain & suffering
> without some say by the supplier, and prisoner, of info made available?
>
> I'd guess an organization buying an RFID system will be keen to load
> it up with info, but when it's personal, those people concerned and the
> RFID provider may find a clear industry-code-of-conduct regarding any
> such 'tag over-loading of personal info' issues a useful code precaution.
>
> I'm sure the ACT Gov will be aware of any such issues, but what about
> privately run prisons? I think your industry, and the general public,
> needs a strong RFIDing-people industry-wide code of conduct immediately.
>   
Stephen, I am interested in testing the principles outlined to see if 
they can address the concerns. So far even in this case, they would 
appear to alleviate your concerns (obviously provided they could be 
enforced)

Reg
Geoffrey Ramadan

> --
>
> Cheers, Geoff
> Stephen Loosley
> Melbourne, Australia
>
>
> Message sent using MelbPC WebMail Server
>
>
>
>