Harsh criticism of Aussie biometric practices

Australia’s biggest banks and the New South Wales (NSW) Roads and Traffic Authority joined the NSW Council of Civil Liberties in harsh criticism of the biometrics industry for sidelining privacy concerns in a regulatory environment that can only be described as “weak and unethical.” NSW Council of Civil Liberties president, Cameron Murphy, slammed providers, the government, and users of the technology for failing to adopt even minimal standards when implementing biometrics. Using last week’s Biometric Institute of Australia annual conference in Sydney, Murphy said an industry-backed privacy code introduced in September 2006 has been virtually ignored. Computerworld’s Darren Pauli reports that Murphy highlighted the fact that only four out of 61 user groups and 63 vendors have signed the Biometrics Institute Privacy Code even though it is an industry-negotiated standard aimed to give users more confidence in the intrusive technology.

Murphy said that function-creep is one of the biggest privacy threats posed by biometrics, as government, law enforcement, and industry have regularly acquired biometric data for use outside of its intended purpose. “Think of the wider context that biometric technology can be used outside its normal function; it is used by governments to track people, and we get cases of the police acquiring employee data such as fingerprints, for completely unrelated cases,” he warned. The trouble is that no one in industry can guarantee to protect biometric data despite technology advancements. “Biometrics can reduce the quantity of ID thefts, but the risks are greater because it requires more sensitive information,” he added.