PA Consulting

[Incognito]

Incognito are you for 1 instant suggesting that everyone connected with the implementation, administration, maintenance, use, access and population of this ID database would have to be DV cleared? That would run into tens of thousands of people, hundreds of thousands if you consider anyone who could legitimately access a terminal which could swipe the card and verify the biometrics.
The DVA has enough problems clearing half a dozen people for a project inside of 9 months and the cost for a DV for each person isn't chicken feed.

As to the assertion that Biometric data can't be forged that's absurd since unless you collect the data to a very exacting standard in the first place (as described above) putting any dirtywork aside the basic coincidental similarities when you have a few hundred thousand let alone 60 million records make it totally unreliable.

Answer to your DV query, Administrators and Operators, not the same.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/617215-post101.html

You can't 'forge' your 'biometric' data when you are not involved in the capture of that data and that data could be iris scans, fingerprints, facial recognition scans, DNA profiling, etc. You may have a single false positive, but you would not have more than one. I believe it is almost statistically impossible.

[Bob Dalek]

Answer to your DV query, Administrators and Operators, not the same.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/617215-post101.html

You can't 'forge' your 'biometric' data when you are not involved in the capture of that data and that data could be iris scans, fingerprints, facial recognition scans, DNA profiling, etc. You may have a single false positive, but you would not have more than one. I believe it is almost statistically impossible.

I thought that a person like you was statistically impossible... ah well.

[TykeMerc]

Stop that - you'll confuse him with facts.

Sorry, but having had to conduct intensive tests of Biometric reading equipment some of which cost an insane amount of money I don't trust the technology. To put my comments in context we tested with a fair number of volunteers and staff from various walks of life and had a lot of false positives and negatives with iris and fingerprint biometrics.

8 sets of identical twins (including my 4 year old nieces) despite theoretically having unique characteristics were similar enough to give each others ID's at least 5% of the time and in 1 set of twins 35% of the time.
A keen amateur base player who broke his hand in a rugby game 2 days after having his details collected gave a solid negative after recovery as his playing calouses (sp?) had gone, when he got them back they were different enough to still negative him.
The father of a staff member who volunteered is a carpenter and his fingerprints were all but illegible after 30+ years in the trade working with abrasives glues and sharp things that scarred his fingers. A Forensic print specialist consulted said that the carpenters prints were entirely typical and wasn't at all surprised when the biometric scanners gave him positives on 10 other volunteers and repeated negatives on himself over a 3 month period.
We had any number of problems caused by glasses, drugs, contacts, alergies (me, bit of hayfever one day, negative ID) and minor eye infections cocking up the supposedly perfect iris scanners biometrics.

As I said earlier the state of the Biometric scanning art is too neolithic for me to trust for a population of any size and then only with microscopic scans taken in the first place with the very best (and expensive) equipment on at both the data collection and verification ends.

[Incognito]

Sorry, but having had to conduct intensive tests of Biometric reading equipment some of which cost an insane amount of money I don't trust the technology. To put my comments in context we tested with a fair number of volunteers and staff from various walks of life and had a lot of false positives and negatives with iris and fingerprint biometrics.

8 sets of identical twins (including my 4 year old nieces) despite theoretically having unique characteristics were similar enough to give each others ID's at least 5% of the time and in 1 set of twins 35% of the time.
A keen amateur base player who broke his hand in a rugby game 2 days after having his details collected gave a solid negative after recovery as his playing calouses (sp?) had gone, when he got them back they were different enough to still negative him.
The father of a staff member who volunteered is a carpenter and his fingerprints were all but illegible after 30+ years in the trade working with abrasives glues and sharp things that scarred his fingers. A Forensic print specialist consulted said that the carpenters prints were entirely typical and wasn't at all surprised when the biometric scanners gave him positives on 10 other volunteers and repeated negatives on himself over a 3 month period.
We had any number of problems caused by glasses, drugs, contacts, alergies (me, bit of hayfever one day, negative ID) and minor eye infections cocking up the supposedly perfect iris scanners biometrics.

As I said earlier the state of the Biometric scanning art is too neolithic for me to trust for a population of any size and then only with microscopic scans taken in the first place with the very best (and expensive) equipment on at both the data collection and verification ends.

You're the only person on here that has come up with solid reasoning behind why you are unhappy with the idea. I'd be interested in knowing what equipment you trialled. I do not doubt your research, but friends and family does not sound like a professionally implemented feasibility study.

I'm giving you an example here of a Biometric study, but before all the luddites seize on it as proof of failure of Biometric data, the study was conducted in 2004 and the goal of the trial was to test the processes and record customer experience rather than test the technology itself. This did not involve Thales.

I thought that a person like you was statistically impossible... ah well.

Yeah good point, well put, so very adult like. Next time don't bother.

[TykeMerc]

You're the only person on here that has come up with solid reasoning behind why you are unhappy with the idea. I'd be interested in knowing what equipment you trialled. I do not doubt your research, but friends and family does not sound like a professionally implemented feasibility study.

I'm giving you an example here of a Biometric study, but before all the luddites seize on it as proof of failure of Biometric data, the study was conducted in 2004 and the goal of the trial was to test the processes and record customer experience rather than test the technology itself. This did not involve Thales.

Staff, friends and family were amongst the volunteers yes. Since the reseach was conducted over months and took quite a bit of disruption to the the subjects it's not like we could have lobbed an advert in the local paper. The population of test subjects had to meet the correct demographics too so various institutions were approached for assistance.

[Incognito]

What equipment did you trial and what were your False Match Rate, False Non-Match Rate, and Failure to Enroll rate data returns?

[TykeMerc]

What equipment did you trial and what were your False Match Rate, False Non-Match Rate, and Failure to Enroll rate data returns?

Sorry, that information is commercially sensitive so I obviously won't discuss it.

[Incognito]

Sorry, that information is commercially sensitive so I obviously won't discuss it.

Not even what you trialled?

[Peoplesoft bloke]

You're the only person on here that has come up with solid reasoning behind why you are unhappy with the idea.

I have explained a number of detailed reasons why I object, but you are too blinkered to accept them.

before all the luddites seize on it

Let's get something clear - I am as geeky as the next bloke where a new technology offers me a benefit, so accusing me or any opponent of ID cards of being Luddites is just plain childish name-calling. Just because a technology exists doesn't make its use essential.

The ID card scheme does not offer me any benefits at all. You can do no more than make vague assertions which you are good enough to admit have not been subject to any cost benefit analysis. You cannot point to any concrete benefits that justify the huge expense and inconvenience to the majority of law abiding citizens.

[Incognito]

I have, you just don't agree with them. No point carrying this on.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/614027-post10.html