|
|
학교에서 지문을 찍는 눈동자는 불필요하고, 관입 불안하다
토요일, 2007년 7월 28일
학교 그렉 Mulholland를 위한 여성해방운동 Dem 그림자 성직자는 학교에 있는 생물 측정 자료의 사용에 연기 토론 공동 주택 지도한다. 토론을, 그렉 Mulholland, 학교를 위한 여성해방운동 Dem 그림자 성직자는 열어서 말했다: ? 이 국가에서는, 학교의 수천은 3 눈동자 젊음에서 생물 측정 자료의 지문 또는 다른 모양을 만큼 모으고 있다. 그들은 도서관 책의 등록, 대여 및 학교 저녁식사의 행정을 위해 모은다. 몇몇 진취적인 회사는 가져오는 이득 및 이 포장을 판매하기 위하여 학교를 직접적으로 접촉한다. 새로운 부는에서 얼마나 많은 학교가 이것에 의하여 일어나고 있는지 잘 모른다. 그것은 국가에 있는 각 현지 교육 권위 지역에서 일어나고 있다는 것을 비공식적인 조사가 건의했더라도 에도 불구하고, 얼마나 많은 학교가 생물 측정 자료를 모으고 있는지 정부에는의 아무 기록도 없는가.? ? 그러나 운동 조직에 의해 설문조사를 한 그들을 남겨둔다 혼자서 아이에 의하여 1 차 3,500와 중등 학교가 지금 생물 측정 자료 체계를 이용한ㄴ다는 것을 고, 그리고 대략 750,000명의 아이들이 그들의 학교에 의해 지문을 찍었다는 것을 추정되었다. 주 20의 새로운 학교가 그 숫자에 추가되고 있다는 것을 고 추정된다. 그러므로, 문제점은 해결될 필요가 있는가.? ? 1개의 것은 확실하다: 우리는 얼마나 많은 학교가 이것에 의하여 안으로 일어나고 있는지 알고 있을지도 모르지만, 부모가 동의를 수시로 요구되고지 않 그리고 많은 경우에 동등한 정보통 인 것이 아니다는 것을 우리는 안다. 몇몇 학교는 편지 가정을 - 어떤 한다 그래서 체계가 소개되기 전에, 이후에 어떤 - 보낼 것이다 그러나 저것을 하는 아무 필요조건도 없다. 부모, 부모 그룹 중 진짜 관심사가 있고, 나 두려워하는 이 점까지 시민의 자유 조직 정부에 의해 묵살되었다.? Mulholland 씨는 정부가 마지막으로 그의 토론의 바로 일에 생물 측정 자료의 사용에 학교를 위한 지도를 간행했었다 는 사실을 환영했다. 자료의 안전에 학교에서 모았다, Mulholland 씨는 말했다: ? 독립적인 기술 전문가는 그들의 의견에서 자료가 안전하게 남아 있을 것이라고 말하는 것은 불가능하다는 것을 주장했다. Advances in technology mean that it is inaccurate to say that it will not be possible to reverse-engineer the data stored in order to obtain the original fingerprint.? ?There is also concern about how the data is stored. It is generally stored on small school networks or stand-alone PCs, with the most basic level of firewall protection and anti-theft protection, or it is held by the agencies who provide the technologies - and we are talking, of course, about an industry that is unregulated. Further, as Action on Rights for Children points out, schools are not secure places. Theft of school equipment is alarmingly frequent and IT equipment is a magnet for thieves.? ?Banks invest millions of pounds in constantly updating and adapting their security systems to prevent identity fraud, but how can schools be expected to do the same? However, unlike a bank personal identification number ? PIN - biometric data cannot be changed in the event of theft or identity fraud, and a person?s biometric data remains the same for a lifetime. Therefore, once stolen, it is compromised forever.? ?How long data is stored is also an issue. Schools act independently. Some might destroy the data they hold as soon as the child leaves school, but there is nothing to stop them keeping the data for longer, or permanently, if they have sufficient storage space. Not only does that raise questions about whether the data could be used by organisations, including the police or security services, in later life, or indeed while the child is still at school, it raises further concerns about the security of the data and the chance that it might be compromised.? Mr Mulholland concluded: ?The collection of biometric data by schools is not necessary. It is interesting to note that swipe cards are 100 per cent. accurate when passed over a reader, but biometric systems such as fingerprint scanners are only 93 per cent. accurate. So they are less accurate than swipe cards and considerably more expensive.? ?It raises many issues, including those of security, consent and information, as well as benefit, necessity and cost. I mean cost not only in monetary terms, but in the possible ramifications and consequences of the introduction of that practice. The government have been too slow to listen and too slow to act. They are finally engaging with the issue, but their response is still inadequate. It is not enough to say that parents should be consulted. They must be consulted, if biometric data, such as fingerprints, are to be taken from their children. Like a child?s safety on a school trip, the collection of a child?s fingerprints or other biometric data is enormously important, and should be treated with the same respect.? ?I have come to the conclusion that the costs of introducing that technology into our schools utterly outweigh any positive benefits that may ensue. The collection of biometric data in our schools is unnecessary, intrusive and insecure. A can of worms has been opened and, as yet, the government have failed adequately to close it. The situation is now a little clearer, but we want real clarity. The only way to achieve real clarity is for the government to say that schools must always ask parents for consent before taking biometric data from children.? Have Your Say: Pupil fingerprinting in schools is unnecessary, intrusive and insecure Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Related News
|
ITS NOW A DOCUMENTED FACT: Whitehall devised torture policy Last post by Unregistered @ 06:52 PM Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
Abe Lincoln hangs 38 Santee Sioux Minnesota 1862!! Last post by noneedtohidenow @ 06:04 PM IF YOU HAVE A GUN, now could be a good time to stock up with Ammo Last post by Nostalgia @ 05:41 PM Britons on trial over "airliner bomb plot" Last post by loki @ 03:39 PM 'Jewish war victims have had enough compensation' French court says Last post by loki @ 03:33 PM Another U.S.-Sponsored Catastrophe The Nightmare in Somalia Last post by loki @ 03:29 PM Police foil bomb attack at Citibank in Athens Last post by loki @ 03:11 PM Tessa Jowell's estranged husband jailed for 4 years for accepting Berlusconi bribe Last post by loki @ 02:51 PM Homeless families face overstrict new rules Last post by Victor @ 11:31 AM England, that great colonising land, has itself become a colony Last post by loki @ 10:38 AM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More Breaking News  Archive
|
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
Loading ...
