Business Today

Privacy worries take hit in fight against terrorism

September 3, 2002
By Donna Goodison

America's vulnerability was laid out before the world on Sept. 11, sparking debate on a host of technologies to thwart future attacks.

Biometric scanning, national identification cards and video surveillance now are on the table to protect borders and citizens.

The increased interest in weeding out undesirables at U.S. borders and keeping tabs on who's here has prompted privacy activists to fear the United States will become a "show us your papers'' society, and its citizens will become "human bar codes.'' Before Sept. 11, such ideas might have given Americans greater pause, according to Mihir Kshirsagar, policy analyst for the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington.

"It's just now they have a new purpose and justification,'' Kshirsagar said of the technologies. "The initial acceptance is higher.''

Before Sept. 11, biometric technology - facial, finger, hand, iris and voice scans - was emerging as a technology. A scan is translated into a mathematical formula and encoded on a magnetic strip or microchip and embedded in a card.

Hand scans had been in use for season-pass holders at some amusement parks and New York health clubs. Iris scans were being tested for automated teller machine users. A number of U.S. airports also were testing fingerprint and hand-geometry scans.

"It's still an emerging industry, but there's an increased focus on it post-Sept. 11,'' said Jacqueline Lucas, marketing director at International Biometric Group LLC, a New York consulting firm.

The heightened focus, however, has yet to translate into big wins for biometric technology companies.

"We haven't seen a major impact in the industry as much as people perceive,'' Lucas said.

Post-Sept. 11 legislation has applications for biometrics, but many of those directives will take time to implement.

International Biometric Group completed a report in June for the federal Transportation Security Administration evaluating how biometrics can be used for air-travel safety.

The Aviation and Transportation Security Act calls for increased airport surveillance and control of employee access to airports and suggests a program that would identify nonrisk or low-risk travelers who'd be able to bypass more thorough screenings. Under the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002, the Department of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service must develop a system of "tamper-resistant, machine-readable documents containing biometric identifiers.''

Though some consider it invasive having their fingerprints or facial scans on file, Lucas compares the collection of the information to personal information in credit-card company databases.

"It's not biometrics that pose a privacy risk or invasion, it's how those biometrics are being used or monitored,'' she said.

Wayne Crews, director of technology policy at Washington's Cato Institute, objects to proposals for a national identification card containing biometric information.

"It's an involuntary database,'' Crews said. "You're being forced into a database against your will.''

And, Crews noted, not all terrorists have criminal backgrounds, and it's likely they, too, could obtain identification cards.

Video cameras can be a reasonable law-enforcement tool, Crews said, so long as they're not used to track innocent people.

The 2001 Super Bowl in Tampa, Fla., was dubbed the "Snooper Bowl'' for its use of video surveillance that included technology by Littleton-based Viisage Technology Inc. Florida police took digital photographs of spectators and compared them with photos of known terrorists and criminals.

"That can be appropriate,'' Crews said. Law-enforcement authorities were trying to match faces against photos of criminals and information in databases collected under appropriate Fourth Amendment procedures, he said.

In Washington, though, the Metropolitan Police Department's installation of 14 surveillance cameras at downtown sites considered at high risk for terrorist attacks resulted in a public outcry. The closed-circuit television cameras are linked wirelessly to a command center.

"The city council has been really proactive on this issue,'' said Kshirsagar, noting the cameras can't be used to record information until guidelines are approved. "We think that surveillance cameras are not an effective security device. Experience has shown in England that it's done nothing to (stop) terrorism.''