Top Essay Writers
We carefully choose the most exceptional writers to become part of our team, each with specialized knowledge in particular subject areas and a background in academic writing.
Posted: November 14th, 2022
Biometric Identification in Everyday life
Biometric Identification in Everyday life
Biometric Identification
Biometric technology stores fingerprints or other bio-identities to enable one to access a variety of devices. Biometric identification systems are used to identify authorized personnel by the use of their unique physical traits like retina, fingerprints, voice recognition, face, and signatures among others (Jacobsen, 2012). This technology is basically a solution to most security issues in the financial and businesses and is used to protect these sectors from fraud and dangers due to identity forgery. The use of biometric identification was introduced after the 9/11 tragedy in the U.S when there were terror attacks by unidentified terrorists. The physical biometrics cannot be duplicated, making it more accurate for identification purposes.
Despite the security rendered by the biometric identifications, there are several issues it has, especially, with regards to its influence on the human cultures. Biometrics identification, unlike other forms of recognition, has physical ties to a person’s physical body. The main social issue in this technique is because of the permanent link between the records about a person and the biometric traits. For convenience, the improved fraud reduction, security, and other benefits of biometrics identification must also consider the effects on the society at large in terms of privacy and health protection. The efficacy of biometric technology highly depends on the culture, legal considerations and the community at large which would define how people would interact with the system (National Research Council, 2010). For instance, some people may refuse to use the biometrics for fear of contracting diseases, some due to fear of how their images may be used, and some due to customary adornment. In all these cases, the system’s performance is likely to be compromised. Today, no discussions on biometric technology end without someone raising privacy concerns. The system exaggeratingly collects vast amount of personal information that is prone to hacking, thereby, would threaten an individual’s life.
Biometric technology was meant to protect the business, institutions, and financial sectors against credit cards hacking, ATMs fraudsters, login issues, bank accounts frauds, et cetera. It was basically meant to deal with many issues in big and small institutions. Nevertheless, the introduction of biometric technology has harmed some institutions, for instance, the Apple, whose biometric data was a leeway of the privacy threats of its users. In 2013, the German hackers were able to access and use the duplicate fingerprints to access the Apple iPhone (Emspak, 2017). While the latest smartphones introduce sophisticated 3D cameras to capture facial images, the swindlers also employ high tech methods to cope up with the new dynamics to by-pass the set security. For instance, the hackers were able to bypass the facial recognition scanner of the Samsung Galaxy S8.
Databases that handle biometric data are themselves a threat to privacy due to the introduction of the biometric identification technology. It is a challenge to ensure that the transmission is secure, and also making sure that the access to the database is under control. The fraudsters have even found a technique of duplicating fingerprints. Also, the life of those who can authorize access to a system can be in danger when perpetrators of crimes use force to use their biometrics. Also, the raw biometric data may cause health risks, and in such cases, the banks, and insurance companies may be forced to access the personal information of users. Sometimes, the problems that lead to privacy invasion may be due to social profiling, where biometric data can be mistakenly linked due to close relationships.
Culture and religion are very crucial in deploying biometrics and must be assessed and considered (Hannah, 2014). The females in the Middle East, and those who are the Muslims; for instance, put on head garments and, therefore, the system may compromise their belief in case it must be deployed. Politically, the biometric technology is attributed to the west, particularly, the U.S.A. This means that the application of this technology in the rest of the world attribute an economic and political power to the west. According to the article on bio-political Tattooing by Agamben (2004), every form of technology initiated by the west often finds their way in the rest of the world in the form of civilization. However, sometimes, the technology is insensitive to the people it is supposed to serve. For instance, it would be humiliating to ask a female Muslim or Middle Eastern to remove the headscarf to be biometrically identified. Control techniques by use of technology should be constrained not to cross certain thresholds because that would lead to a bio-political era and what Michael Foucault called progressive animalization (Agamben, 2004). The process should not be mandatory but should be informed by free and active participation.
The local governments in most nations are planning to take a picture of children and append their details to help in checking signs of child abuse, neglect, and identify health-related issues. Today, nations, including the U.S, are planning to share biometric data with other countries (Zuccarini, 2013). However, most people are worried by the initiative and how their information may be used. This technique compromises people’s privacy even though the initiators have the plan to uphold the nations’ security.
References
Agamben, G. (2004). “No to bio-political tattooing” Le Monde 10 January. English translation at http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/totalControl.html.
Emspak, J. (2017). Should Apple iPhone X Trust Facial Recognition for Security? Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/should-apple-iphone-x-trust-facial-recognition-for-security/
Hannah, M. G. (2014). Biometrics: Bodies, Technologies, Biopolitics.
Jacobsen, K. L. (2012). Biometrics as security technology: Expansion amidst fallibility (No. 2012: 07). DIIS Reports/Danish Institute for International Studies.
National Research Council, & Whither Biometrics Committee. (2010). Biometric recognition: challenges and opportunities. National Academies Press.
Zuccarini, M. (2013). Our Biometric Future: Facial Recognition Technology and the Culture of Surveillance.
Biometric Identification
Biometric technology stores fingerprints or other bio-identities to enable one to access a variety of devices. Biometric identification systems are used to identify authorized personnel by the use of their unique physical traits like retina, fingerprints, voice recognition, face, and signatures among others (Jacobsen, 2012). This technology is basically a solution to most security issues in the financial and businesses and is used to protect these sectors from fraud and dangers due to identity forgery. The use of biometric identification was introduced after the 9/11 tragedy in the U.S when there were terror attacks by unidentified terrorists. The physical biometrics cannot be duplicated, making it more accurate for identification purposes.
Despite the security rendered by the biometric identifications, there are several issues it has, especially, with regards to its influence on the human cultures. Biometrics identification, unlike other forms of recognition, has physical ties to a person’s physical body. The main social issue in this technique is because of the permanent link between the records about a person and the biometric traits. For convenience, the improved fraud reduction, security, and other benefits of biometrics identification must also consider the effects on the society at large in terms of privacy and health protection. The efficacy of biometric technology highly depends on the culture, legal considerations and the community at large which would define how people would interact with the system (National Research Council, 2010). For instance, some people may refuse to use the biometrics for fear of contracting diseases, some due to fear of how their images may be used, and some due to customary adornment. In all these cases, the system’s performance is likely to be compromised. Today, no discussions on biometric technology end without someone raising privacy concerns. The system exaggeratingly collects vast amount of personal information that is prone to hacking, thereby, would threaten an individual’s life.
Biometric technology was meant to protect the business, institutions, and financial sectors against credit cards hacking, ATMs fraudsters, login issues, bank accounts frauds, et cetera. It was basically meant to deal with many issues in big and small institutions. Nevertheless, the introduction of biometric technology has harmed some institutions, for instance, the Apple, whose biometric data was a leeway of the privacy threats of its users. In 2013, the German hackers were able to access and use the duplicate fingerprints to access the Apple iPhone (Emspak, 2017). While the latest smartphones introduce sophisticated 3D cameras to capture facial images, the swindlers also employ high tech methods to cope up with the new dynamics to by-pass the set security. For instance, the hackers were able to bypass the facial recognition scanner of the Samsung Galaxy S8.
Databases that handle biometric data are themselves a threat to privacy due to the introduction of the biometric identification technology. It is a challenge to ensure that the transmission is secure, and also making sure that the access to the database is under control. The fraudsters have even found a technique of duplicating fingerprints. Also, the life of those who can authorize access to a system can be in danger when perpetrators of crimes use force to use their biometrics. Also, the raw biometric data may cause health risks, and in such cases, the banks, and insurance companies may be forced to access the personal information of users. Sometimes, the problems that lead to privacy invasion may be due to social profiling, where biometric data can be mistakenly linked due to close relationships.
Culture and religion are very crucial in deploying biometrics and must be assessed and considered (Hannah, 2014). The females in the Middle East, and those who are the Muslims; for instance, put on head garments and, therefore, the system may compromise their belief in case it must be deployed. Politically, the biometric technology is attributed to the west, particularly, the U.S.A. This means that the application of this technology in the rest of the world attribute an economic and political power to the west. According to the article on bio-political Tattooing by Agamben (2004), every form of technology initiated by the west often finds their way in the rest of the world in the form of civilization. However, sometimes, the technology is insensitive to the people it is supposed to serve. For instance, it would be humiliating to ask a female Muslim or Middle Eastern to remove the headscarf to be biometrically identified. Control techniques by use of technology should be constrained not to cross certain thresholds because that would lead to a bio-political era and what Michael Foucault called progressive animalization (Agamben, 2004). The process should not be mandatory but should be informed by free and active participation.
The local governments in most nations are planning to take a picture of children and append their details to help in checking signs of child abuse, neglect, and identify health-related issues. Today, nations, including the U.S, are planning to share biometric data with other countries (Zuccarini, 2013). However, most people are worried by the initiative and how their information may be used. This technique compromises people’s privacy even though the initiators have the plan to uphold the nations’ security.
References
Agamben, G. (2004). “No to bio-political tattooing” Le Monde 10 January. English translation at http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/totalControl.html.
Emspak, J. (2017). Should Apple iPhone X Trust Facial Recognition for Security? Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/should-apple-iphone-x-trust-facial-recognition-for-security/
Hannah, M. G. (2014). Biometrics: Bodies, Technologies, Biopolitics.
Jacobsen, K. L. (2012). Biometrics as security technology: Expansion amidst fallibility (No. 2012: 07). DIIS Reports/Danish Institute for International Studies.
National Research Council, & Whither Biometrics Committee. (2010). Biometric recognition: challenges and opportunities. National Academies Press.
Zuccarini, M. (2013). Our Biometric Future: Facial Recognition Technology and the Culture of Surveillance.