Slashdot Mirror
Linux Biometrics Site Opens Doors
flickerfly writes "A new site to unite the individuals interested in Linux and Biometrics has opened its doors. LinuxBiometrics.com's purpose is to fill the biometrics void in the Open Source community. With the increased adoption of Linux in europe and the recent increase in biometrics interest by the EU, this appears to be a field ready to blossom into heavy adoption and will be in need of OSS support."
.. and besides, doesnt biometrics suck? It's all about onetime identifiers. You cant easily change your eye, breath or thumbprint if they happened to fall into the wrong hands.
I think ever since seeing the classic sci-fi series http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/classic/blakes7/Blake's 7 as a kid the idea of biometric locks has filled me with dread.
There is a scene where the protagonists try to persuade the guard they have over powered to put his hand on the sensor to open the door so they can progress their escape. Naturally he is not helping.
Then Gan says to him: Look, we only need the hand. If you want to stay attached to it, do as you're told.
Strangely enough, instant compliance!
Linux + biometrics = optional
Ok, OS biometric software = better than closed source, with reasons being obvious to your possibly paranoid self.
"humans, being so error prone, can never come up with a fool proof system"
Well there are these things called proofs, and they're used to prove things, such as how possible it is to break an encryption algorithm, or bypass some logical sequence of security.
Why are people going to suddenly start dying or automated systems start taking "'pre-emptive' action" because there's the choice of OSS for biometric identification?
One minute you're saying "And assuming ppl do get tech savvy, and put up monitors (the human kind) we come back to the same old question of who monitors the monitors??" and then next it's "Give me ppl any damn time.".
Whether biometrics can be used alone or with human assistance for important identification is different from whether OS alternatives to the software are good, and seperate again from living in a society that has surrendered control to a corrupt government.
Unless you avoid ever touching a doorknob or hand-rail, I don't see what difference this makes. Common surfaces are everywhere. We all touch them all the time. Sometimes we catch something from a common surface. Adding a palm scanner to the mix doesn't increase the risk of transmission.
..and you are out. These two and three strikes and you get life laws that a lot of states have now have upped the ultraviolence potential of muggers, house burglars, car jackers, etc. If they know if they get caught for their second or third offense and will receive life, they are now just as apt to conk you on the head after they milked the atm machine dry of your cash. Finger or no finger biometrics, that's the reality on the ground now. Look at how many quick store employees just get shot right off the bat for some junky's next few bucks for a fix now. You see, you don't know in advance that Mr. Badguy is just going to be content with the cash, you have even odds now that he will also want to dispose of the witness in some manner after he's done using you. You have yto be psychic to know if he's going to harm you later or not, which isn't a pleasant thing to be forced into. In other words, remaining passive about the whole crime is no longer a good option, you are almost forced to assume the crime will escalate, and not in your favor.
Of course, there's option #5 a lot of us have now, it's called being armed and trained and ready to use it. Works a charm in a lot of situations. Not all, but quite a few. No sense in allowing yourself to be a professional victim in advance.
Biometrics are good at identification (= capability of differentiating between a set of individuals) but weak at authentification (= capability of certifying that an individual really is who he pretends to be). They are a good ide wherever you would use a "login". They are a bad idea wherever you would use a "password".