[LINK] SMH Blurb tries to help ailing biometrics industry - 1

Adam Todd link at todd.inoz.com
Wed Feb 20 23:26:09 EST 2008

At 22:04 19/02/2008, Roger Clarke wrote:
>HALF a decade before the twin towers fell in New York, Ted Dunstone 
>completed his PhD exploring how computers and biometrics could be 
>used to detect terrorists at airports.  [COMMENTS 1, 2]

I'm sorry I don't understand how this is possible.

If you finger, photo and dna record every person who has a legitimate 
need to travel, that's not detecting terrorists, that's detecting 
innocent people.

If "they" already have images of terrorists, then why not just use 
those images against CCTV images to detect, they don't need my face, 
I'm not a terrorist.

I'm sure Terrorists aren't filling in VISA forms ticking "YES" to to 
the terrorists questions.

And seriously taking photos and finger prints of 3 year old children 
is an insult to the intelligence of the few of us that are smart 
enough to really see what is going on.

>Today he's still working out how biometrics can be harnessed to 
>ensure the right people get access to sensitive locations, equipment 
>and information.

What, you need a database of 6 billion people to cross check against 
the 500 odd terrorists?

Wouldn't it be easier to have a database of terrorists and not the innocent?

Besides, he's "still" trying to get it to work :)

>And it's dead. Or is it? Citing concerns about privacy and a 
>mismatch between the cost of the project compared with the savings 
>it might deliver, Senator Joe Ludwig, Minister for Human Services, 
>has canned the $1.3 billion four-year program and confirmed "there 
>are no plans to revisit the access card in the future. Spending over 
>$1 billion on a magic card is not the solution."

Mmm, if they can't get a smart card to work for a us and train, what 
hope is there it will work for something more sophisticated across 
multiple departments with separate databases and ... shall I continue?

Why have separate departments with separate privacy policies if ALL 
access is granted by a common database?  Seems smarter to just have 
one department, one set of staff, one database.

Remove billions in Staffing and IT costs around Australia, increase 
the Public Service unemployed but hey, it's going to save heaps of 
money for the consumer - right?

More information about the Link mailing list