Slashdot Mirror
Library to Require Fingerprint to Use PCs
FearUncertaintyDoubt writes "Three libraries in Naperville, IL, soon will start requiring patrons who use the library's PCs to provide a fingerprint scan. The article says, ' Library officials say the added security is necessary to ensure people who are using the computers are who they say they are. Officials promise to protect the confidentiality of the fingerprint records.'"
"Right now we give you a library card with a bar code attached to it. This is just a bar code, but it's built in," said Mark West, the library's deputy director.
To be fair that does come after this paragraph:
Naperville library officials said the technology cannot be used to reconstruct a person's actual fingerprint. The scanners, made by Naperville-based U.S. Biometrics Corp., use an algorithm to convert 15 or more specific points into a unique numeric sequence.
But it's still shockingly cavalier to describe the technology as "just a bar code". I have difficulty understanding a) why this seems like a good idea to anyone, and b) why this gentleman seems incapable of understanding people's worries about a fucking library requiring fingerprints!
Carousel is a lie!
Officials promise to protect the confidentiality of the fingerprint records.
What does that mean exactly? Doesn't the "Patriot" Act allow for law enforcement officials to easily obtain library records during investigations? I know that the ALA has spoken against the "Patriot" Act in the past but will they actually stop the LEOs from taking this information?
The three-library system this week signed a $40,646 contract with a local company, U.S. Biometrics Corp., to install fingerprint scanners on 130 computers with Internet access or a time limit on usage.
Library officials say the added security is necessary to ensure people who are using the computers are who they say they are.
$313 a computer seems like an awful lot of money for this. I'm not sure what they are trying to accomplish other than wasting taxpayer dollars.
Once a patron's fingerprint has been recorded, accessing a computer will require only the touch of a finger.
"Right now we give you a library card with a bar code attached to it. This is just a bar code, but it's built in," West said.
So patrons used to scan their library card and they could use the computer? There is no difference now except a database of information tied to a fingerprint that can easily be looked into by employees, LEOs, and possible thieves.
West said the library is requiring a fingerprint to set up computer access, although patrons who object could ask a staff member to log them on to a computer.
Are they going to make this perfectly clear to all patrons with a large sign in blinking neon? I doubt it. Make sure to give the staff a hassle. We need to hassle businesses (public and private) more so that these privacy intrusions cease. We will continue heading down the slope due to "ease" if people continue to stand down.
...a copy of Elvis's fingerprint?
Initially, I was against this development, but after reading TFA, I actually feel al lot better aboout it, for a few reasons:
From TFA:
The library taking a stand like this gives me slightly more confidence in trusting them with biometric data...at least they won't give it up without the proper authorization, but this doesn't address the issue of data theft. The following quote, however...
Also from TFA:
It's important to note that most biometric systems work in this fashion. If each organization who wished to use biometrics were required to use their own, distinctive algorithm, the danger of other organizations using that biometric data for its own purposes would be greatly reduced.
Actually, there's just one thing in TFA that troubles me:
Come now, Mark...which is it...confidentiality or privacy? They can't both be your middle name...
^_^
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
This really begs the question: Why do they need to know who that the person in front of the computer is who they say they are? What purpose does this serve?
"We take people's fingerprints because we think they might be guilty of something, not because they want to use the library," said Ed Yohnka, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois.
A very apt response from the ACLU. The problem is that we're now into the notion that "everyone is suspect" and due to that, we're going in this direction. It seems like
I could very well imagine this being linked into god-knows-what. Imagine, for instance, having $100 in parking tickets due, and the library terminal refusing you connection to their services before this due is paid.
Finally, anyone who is really interested in doing something criminal will just subvert the system. It's not like it's particularly difficult to spoof a fingerprint scanner. Remember the stories about doing it with Jello? Also, remember the fingerprint scanner that could be defeated by blowing on it?
Just like limitations on guns, just like airport security, just like locks on our doors and car alarms, and just like so many other things, this is used to punish the law abiding citizen, and does nothing to deter the hardened criminal or terrorist.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
that library computer users provide authentication?
I'm sure there are going to be many cries of privacy invasion in regard to this. The library's published reason for taking this measure is:
...library officials discovered that many patrons logged onto library computers using library cards and passwords of friends or relatives. That realization, coupled with a new library policy that allows parents to install automatic Internet filters on their children's accounts, prompted the search for better computer security...
So there's the problem. Please include your personal counter suggestion with any criticisms.
I'm a big tall mofo.
This is just ridiculous. Why do they even care who uses the computers at the library. Around here they don't ask you for anything. You just sit down and go.
They do politely ask you to limit yourself to ten minutes if there's a line.
There is absolutely no good reason for this and it's a clear step toward a totalitarian state.
Help I'm a rock.
have started to give out police station cards in order for a person to check into and out of jail. An officer was quoted as saying "...we like how well the library system [the card] works....it should really help reduce the amount of dirty fingerprints on our walls...I think the biggest problem will be what to do when someone stays checked out to long"
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
Currently patrons use their library cards and personal identification numbers to access the computers.
Whats wrong with this system? Its sounds like they are replacing one two-factor authentication system with another. What will biometrics provide that the current system does not?
to protect the records? How? Hell, outsourced specialization companies chosen by the government can rarely even keep things shut (ChoicePoint), how in the world can they expect to secure the system themselves? What ever happened to the ability to being anonymous? I just finished writing an analytical paper on the fight for Internet Privacy and this just boils me like none other. What worries me the most is that the article states "We take people's fingerprints because we think they might be guilty of something, not because they want to use the library". So now all library goers are guilty? I guess the modern American movement involves throwing out the jury, the judge, and the court itself, and just going straight to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
I'm proud to say that I asked my local librarian if they follow the Patriot Act rules. She said they'd have to, BUT all computer access is anonymous, and they keep no records of checked out books after they're returned. Hell, I was thrilled that a librarian has heard of the Patriot Act.
Wait a minute... Guess I'm confusing names in an otherwise similar reality.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
not only are house prices outrageous there (start at about $300K), but they now want biometrics to use the computers at the library? ridiculous. and to think i used to love going to the nichols library (main branch of naperville library district)
My sports center requires a hand scan to enter the facility. It gives false or unreadable scans so often that most of the guards just wave you through if you look even vaguely trustworthy.
What about those with disabilities (severed limbs) or those with birth defects (extra fingers)? I bet the woman who started the whole "Finger found in Wendy's chili" scam won't be worried at all. She has an extra one she can use. (Okay, that's a bit too far. sorry)
You're missing the point of a public library, it's the people's PC.
So, if I go to this library with a fake ID and they take my fingerprints how are they going to make sure that I am who I claim I am, if they're not crossreferencing any other fingerprint databases?
The whole idea is just completely absurd.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
It should go without saying that there will be creep with use of technology like this... This is such a bad idea. There are better ways to do this than biometrics, and really, does a library need to be that "secure"? What's next, are we going to require fingerprints to register at various websites? I'm sure that'll go over real well.
Oh... Wait.
Yeah, I don't care if it's "ethical," I think I'd just download the book I wanted to read after my community pulled something like that.
/dev/random
This is just another of the many inputs for gathering fingerprints of every (soviet) American. For inclusion in the uberjoined database that BushCo will outsource to their old Iran/Contra IT wing, ChoicePoint and DataBase Technologies.
Securitized for Your Protection (TM).
--
make install -not war
- You know
- You have
- You are
Theoretically fingerprints belong in #3So explain to me again how having a library access card with PIN numbers don't work. Hell, I'm still signing on a register to take books out - which works pretty well for the library.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
maybe the libs will start buying supplies from here.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Bwhahahaha! Wait..are you fscking SERIOUS?!
They could at least have the honesty to admit that they were pressured into it by the Dept. of Homeland Security. Oh wait, no they couldn't.
So the government has yet another way to keep tabs on anyone who happens to be a reader. Wonderful.
Now I have a reason to explain to my wife why I spend $1500 on hardware upgrades every 6 months. After all, we don't want to fall victim to the evil fingerprinting scheme, do we?! :)
Ads? What ads?
The Patriot Act requires libraries to turn over that sort of information to the feds when asked.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
No thank you
It's a freaking LIBRARY. How about authenticating people using their LIBRARY CARD NUMBER and verifying their ID at the time they sign up? In fact, I hear there's this new technology called a PRINTER...when coupled with a digital camera, you can even print someone's face on their ID card.
I bet that's much cheaper, less confusing and less intrusive than a $40,000+ biometric ID system.
The stored numeric data cannot be used to reconstruct a fingerprint, West said, nor can it be cross-referenced with other fingerprint databases such as those kept by the FBI or the Illinois State Police.
So before we get too many people who didn't RTFA saying that the government will be able to get people's fingerprints easily.. well, they won't. Before this a library card was required (it has your name on it), so essentially this will replace your library card as a method of keeping track of who is using the computer.
The difference, however, is that any decent criminal could get a library card with a fake name, but with this system they would have to provide a finger print (though TFA does say that it isn't always necessary, as an employee could login for them). The feds could probably create a system that would interpret the library's data to get files that they could cross-reference with their database. That, really, is the only danger.
So as it stands right now, this is pretty harmless. It's not really any different than using your library card. But, of course, they don't really make a case for why the finger print system is being implemented other than that it might be a bit easier to use.
CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
$40,000 for a security system for a public library?
I'm getting flashbacks to high school where the librarian had anti-theft scanners installed, for a library used by less that 5% of the school population, with a meager, infrequently updated selection of books. In that case the trade-off was that the school would not be able to get a swimming pool and the library would cut back on buying new books.
Maybe she found a new job.
Oh, they promise. Well, that's good enough for me.
Don't worry everybody, nothing to see here. They promised!
I am not usually a supporter of intrusive measures, but I can agree with this.
Library PCs are still accessible, but you need to identify yourself before you use it. It could track where you've been, but considering you using the computer in a public place, in a location that is supposed to be for doing research and learning, most people shouldn't be accessing anything questionable.
It is fairly common that library computers are used as tools for shady and illegal actions. Worried that the FBI might trace that kiddie porn back your IP address? Download it at the library. You need to launch the awesome new virus you wrote? Send it off from the Library. Need to research fertilizer bombs? You guessed it, library.
Before the internet, people read books. If you got the book at the library, they had a record of everything you ever read. Now, people get their information on the Internet. If you get that information from the library, now they have a record of it. It's just an extension of their old policy onto a new medium.
/. ++
-
Eat at Wendy's
-
Order the Chili
-
Use that thumb
[/ob]Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
Clearly trhis library either doenst casre that the feds can request records secretly under the PATRIOT Act, including these innocuous fingerprints or they are in cahoots.
"Library officials say the added security is necessary to ensure people who are using the computers are who they say they are."
So.. let me get this straight...
At my library you can REGISTER TO VOTE with the same application you hand in for a library card.
Let me say that again for those who aren't rolling with laughter:
this library wants more proof you are who you are than the freaking polls at election day!
You sollicit proof of residence and identification for library card applicants, but for some reason you can't trust people's library cards?
Ever hear of Gratis Networks and their freeipods pyramid scheme?
My friends and I would do credit card fraud in the library frequently and got a nice sum of cash shipping the items to a personal USPS post office box.
Why am I admitting to this? Because I am typing this in a library in Downers Grove.
seriously though, an account linked to a library card easily found a criminal, why tie it to a fingerprint?
always mosh clockwise
big brother is watching you look at porn
I assume that means you cant even look up a book title to read in the library without handing over your privacy?
A library is a public resource. They don't need to know who you are unless you plan on checking out a resource to remove from the premises.
"we see here that you were looking up a book about explosives, please come down to the station so we can talk"
---- Booth was a patriot ----
engadget version of story
bbc version of story
On the other hand, my local library recently re-issued me a new library card. They explained that they wanted to get the old cards out of the system, since the records had information on them (like driver's licenses) which they were trying to remove.
Sure, you can't get their *fingerprint* from the points, but you have a unique identifier. I.e., if someone is investigating messages sent from that computer and they round you up as a suspect, they can take your "15 point" fingerprint and ID you.
I believe Bird-Person can arrange that.
...complementary mugshot?
When the PATRIOT act first came out, I remember seeing all these signs and posters around the local libraries, with quotes, explaining the abuses of that law. And, keep in mind, this is in Georgia!, on of the most Red states there is!!!
Ya know, it's ironic that "Red" is now good in America now!
For you youngsters, "red" Used to mean "Communist Fuckers".
You'll want this link, then...
I use my cock for a god damn computer scan, unzip these trousers and lay the head of my cock on this fucking thing... then I can take a piss down the throat of government for being so bloody ignorant to the spirit of American history, it's people and it's founding principles.
This country is going to hell in a hand basket, people need to wake the fuck up.. all of them, go ahead, chip me.. put it right in my fucking forehead.
--
Random Signature #2
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
"...a man who had fondled himself in front of teenagers while viewing pornography in the computer lab at Nichols Library...."
My only question: Did they sterilize the computer station after Captain Jerk Off got arrested? I mean, that's just sick man.
(Can you picture the guy that was in line for this guy's computer? "Yeah, you go ahead. I'll wait for the next one.")
http://augustwestproducts.i8.com
Oh, Naperville. How I hate you so. For those who have never been there, let me give you an idea of what this place is like.
Rich. Conservative. And fucked up beyond belief. Alan Keyes made his home there when he was campaigning in Illinois. It boasts the most expensive highschool in the midwest, and even the shitty highschool on the other side of town has an olympic size swimming pool and a greenhouse.
It's sprawled out so far, that even with all the money the city has, it's getting to the point where it can't afford to plow the whole city when it snows.
So does this surprise me? No, not really. My parents moved out of that town when it was getting gentrified away from a quaint, middle class suburb and into a massive, upper-middle class traffic-fest. It's got a whole lot of libertarians now, for whom 'liberty' really only has anything to do with taxes. Concerning anything else (reproductive rights, personal privacy, etc), they would make small towns in Alabama seem damn near progressive in comparison.
It was never that great of a city to begin with, but right before we left (around 1995 or so), it had turned into what I would imagine a nice, quiet suburb in Nazi Germany was like. You know, everything's fine if you just don't pay too much attention to the smoke rising up in the horizon. I remember kids in my sophmore year social studies class arguing for fascism as a preferred political system. And the teacher didn't trick them, they actually brought up the idea, and were pretty enthusiastic about it.
High school was a frenzy of girls getting raped, drug overdoses, rampant (almost encouraged) racism and classism, severe and rampant anorexia and bullemia, bullying on a scale of Columbine, and just overall one of the worst social atmospheres you could ever subject a kid to.
If anybody ever made a movie about life in this town, it would have to be shot like a horror film.
So, I can't say I'm surprised about this. Naperville's got the money, the right-wing leanings, and the idiocy to do something just like this.
Naperville library officials said the technology cannot be used to reconstruct a person's actual fingerprint. The scanners, made by Naperville-based U.S. Biometrics Corp., use an algorithm to convert 15 or more specific points into a unique numeric sequence. But there's nothing to prevent anyone from taking an actual fingerprint and converting it into one of these codes. Either from a crime scene or an old database.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
So exactly what good does having a fingerprint do if you can't check it with some kind of existing database? I highly doubt the local police will let the library use their records, and even if they did the police are not going to have the figerprints of most citizens.
My bet is whoever made this decision has hooks into the fingerprint technology software or hardware which benifits them in some way. Ochams Razor (sp).
it's the people's PC.
I believe this is the people's pc.
As if the FBI isn't monitoring it already anyway. They are not responsible for non-patrons stealing a library card, or finding a lost one and using it. What was the reason for the millions spent on this system? One incident when a 8th grader stole a teachers library card and tried to access porn? The library is already implementing obscenity filters. If anything, you shouldn't require a card to use the computer. It's just as easy to get a card.
I'm about as stirred as I can get today. Missouri just implemented new strip club laws.
...::----::...
I am in no way affiliated with this sig.
How very convenient. I guess this means I will be able to watch those DVDs I check out from the library afterall...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Adding fingerprint scanners is just a more convenient way to enforce this policy.
Is this a way to scare off the street people from using the computers during those cold winter days?
But it's still shockingly cavalier to describe the technology as "just a bar code".
As he states - it is a one-way algorithm. If I have your barcode off your library card, I cannot reconstruct your name, SSN, birthdate, and all that without going into the library's database. With the number-sequence that this system creates, I cannot reconstruct your fingerprint at all. I cannot reconstruct any of the data previously mentioned without going into the database. So, instead of creating a random number with the unix timestamp as a seed, they are creating a random number with your fingerprint as a seed. What is so shocking about that?
I have difficulty understanding why this seems like a good idea to anyone
Hmmm... I guess someone needs to go to your library, tell them that they are you - they can even print a fake barcode on any old library card since barcode techology is open and freely available to anyone and everyone. Then, they can surf for child porn on your account. When the feds come to your door, you can explain to them that it is a terrible idea for the library to go to every measure to ensure that patrons are who they say they are.
I have difficulty understanding why this gentleman seems incapable of understanding people's worries about a fucking library requiring fingerprints!
There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers. If you cannot see that, then you are forcing yourself to be blind to it.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
In Soviet Russia, the Library checks out YOU!!!
In China, only old people go to the library to use computers.
1. Make fingerprint scanner
2. Con librarians into buying it
3. ???
4. PROFIT!
They can get my fingerprint when they pull my finger out of Cowboy Neal's butt.
Let's see.....Soviet Russia, Chinese old people, profit, Cowboy Neal reference. Now only if this would have been the first post....
First of all, that a library is the force behind this astounds me. My significant other is a librarian (don't laugh...she's actually pretty hot), and if I've seen anything, it's that librarians are very much fans of civil freedom. They're often the first to be confronted with issues of censorship and repression of knowledge, and it's been that way for hundreds of years.
:)
So, that said, I think I can accept their promise not to violate the confidentiality of their records, as long as they can accept the promise that government will only burn the "bad" books. Fair enough, right?
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
First they came to filter library surfing, but I didnt care because I didnt leave the house and surfed the net from home anyways
Then they came for people with fingerprints but I didnt care because my fingerprints were burnt off in a horrible childhood accident
Then they came to implant RFID chips in all newborns, being a loser that never procreates, I didnt even notice.
Then they came for me and well...I'm a loner...so no one even really noticed....
"Library officials say the added security is necessary to ensure people who are using the computers are who they say they are."
I fail to see why this is such a big deal. If I give my library card to my daughter to research a report, or to a buddy, so what? Most libraries already have **SOME** security systems in place and filtering so people can't just hop on those computers and start cyber-terrorizing others or worse. Sure, the dedicated can get past that, but they'll always find a way.
"Right now we give you a library card with a bar code attached to it. This is just a bar code, but it's built in," West said.
Wouldn't it be easier to just tattoo the bar codes on our arms? I seem to remember that being done at one point, but how did that work out...
Since wireless access is fast becoming ubiquitous, and since often you can connect at one place (the library) thru a different place (the nearby hotspot), how will the library react to personal computers connecting to the internet without going thru the library's network? Are they going to ban all personal laptops in libraries? Actually, a connection to the internet is not required to display your porn collection stored on your personal computer. Maybe they are going to require me to install fingerprint readers on my own computer and then validate me with their fingerprint system?
Come on, isn't the goal to keep some pervert from acting out with the library patrons? Wait, I know! How about they walk around the library once in a while and make sure everyone still has their pants zipped up? How hard can that be?
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
...I will bitch slap anyone who suggests raising taxes as an answer to anything. Clearly the government has enough money if they can waste 40k on a redundant security system for library computers.
"I don't need drugs to enjoy this, just to enhance it" - Otto
soon there will be so many unsecured sources containing your "unique" data, that you just be able to grab someone else's when you want to be anonymous.
"I have difficulty understanding a) why this seems like a good idea to anyone, and b) why this gentleman seems incapable of understanding people's worries about a fucking library requiring fingerprints!" Because we're talking about Illinois here. This is the state that cards you to buy six pack of beer even if you're 5O years old. They spit on the shoes of privacy a long, long time ago in that State and the denizens just bend over and take it.
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
Fast forward 10 years... The system was already there so with a little bit of modification we are able to, when someone uses the library system, do a quick check to see if they paid their taxes, are not wanted by the police and they are not a terrorist... by the way, if you are clean, don't worry there is no record of our check...but really do you want people that did not pay their taxes using YOUR system?
... is not the specific case, which is troubling but relatively trivial, but the fact that it represents another step in creeping fingerprintization. I suspect that five years from now fingerprints will be the defacto form of ID in the US, like drivers licenses and SSIDs are now.
Why is it a problem (especially for me, a Canadian resident and British citizen)? Well, simply because I do not trust your government. I currently have *no choice* but to be fingerprinted if I wish to enter the USA. I need to do that for my work, so I just assume the position.
However, it literally makes me think twice about expressing my opinion freely on the net. Anyone who's had to deal with US immigration as a non-US Citizen knows exactly what the attitude is. It would come as no surprise whatever for me to be taken aside at immigration and questioned about opinions I had expressed.
I and many people of my acquaintance have deliberately avoided going the the US since 9/11 simply because of the strange feeling of entering an authoritarian state. The 'new normal' is not normal.
I'm not wrong. You haven't thought about it hard enough.
i agree. and finger printing aside -- i pay my taxes, why the hell do i need permission and 7 forms of id to check my email at the public library?
If you're worried about the government invading your library privacy, you probably SHOULDN'T BE GOING TO THE LIBRARY because they are RUN BY THE GOVERNMENT.
The "public" library system is a government agency. If you want privacy, then go to a damn bookstore like the rest of us. You can reasonably expect a private company to not share your information with the government but expecting the government not to share it with the government shows a fundamental disconnect in your paranoid reasoning.
How can you be paranoid about what the government will do with information you have to voluntarily give them?
Why not just install some cameras that record the people using the computers? Not only would this provide police with identification in the cases cited, it would also provide proof of the "fondling".
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
...because some thug cut them off to gain access to the internet at the library, you insensitive clod!
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
I mean this is Naperville we're talking about here, hotbed of political intrigue. People could be reading *anything* on the internet, communists or even them tree hugger perverts objecting to another golf course or country club.
Deleted
I grew up in Naperville and spent my childhood using the Naperville Public Libraries, and I visit often still because my parents live there. Now that I've moved, I have some perspective I didn't have when I lived there. Naperville is an interesting town. It's a land of burgeoning housing developments and SUVs piloted by soccer moms where people come to raise their kids and shield them from the outside world, because it's a very safe and insulated place. The police department really does have nothing better to do than issue traffic tickets and harass partying high schoolers for violating curfew.
Property values are high, and that keeps the riff-raff out. In the first Naperville neighborhood I lived in, the Chicago Housing Authority had a plan to build mixed-income housing. This was met with bitter resistance, under the guise of worry about gang activity and declining property values. This from a group of senior citizens for whom lower property values would save a lot of money in property taxes.
It's about the last place I'd expect a public outcry against anything claimed to be "for the children," privacy be damned. But maybe things have changed since I left. I hope so, but I'm not optimistic. So should there be such an outcry, I'd gain back a lot of lost faith in Naperville.
On the plus side for the Naperville Public Libraries, they were very receptive to my suggestion of installing Firefox on the same machines that will have the fingerprint scanners. Though that may have been because I said the popup blocking would suppress inappropriate popups, you know, for the children.
Been living here for a while now (moved here for a year from Australia) and my general feelings are that the US is becoming way too paranoid and security concious.
Rights are being eroded all over the place all in the name of national security and people just lie down and take it all. Do otherwise and you run the risk of being branded a lefty.
What bullshit. About time someone stuck it to the pathetic "leaders" here and told them to get the hell out of people's lives.
I prefer the finger to be in the chili when I order it.
the public library checks YOU out!
(sorry, couldn't resist)
Why does it matter that people using a library computer are who they say they are? What does that verification get us as a society? What does it get the library? Identification is required to check out books only because the person takes them outside the library with a promise to return them. One does not have to present identification to look at the books inside the library. Why must they to look at the Internet via computer?
I would never use a library that violates privacy and confidence of personal information in this way. Hopefully enough intelligent people will protest this so those libraries won't do it anymore.
Yet, they'll let kids surf porn!?
Librarian: "Excuse me, Timmy, but if you're planning on surfing SublimeDirectory, you'll have to scan your fingerprint!"
Timmy: "But I'm afraid my mommy will find out!?"
Librarian: "Don't be silly! Surfing porn is a freedom we value here at the public library. One we feel should not only be stifled by us, but your parents either! Rest assured, your activities will be strictly confidential!"
I have a finger I can give them!
It's got a whole lot of libertarians (sic) now, for whom 'liberty' really only has anything to do with taxes
You misspelled "neo-cons".
The "right-wing" stuff has nothing to do with all the stuff you're citing. These are problems with places all over the country.... yes, even in "liberal" school districts. (SHOCK! SURPRISE!)
Anyway, apparently you haven't been to high schools lately. Naperville's isn't the most expensive high school in the midwest, not be a long shot.
There are also all those problems that you cite in many high schools in the country. It's much much worse in some areas.
BTW, Godwin's Law invoked.
And in other local news, Jews are being asked by officials to wear a star. Officials said that there is nothing to worry about, and that no one will be put at risk. "You can trust us!" said one goose-stepping official, who wanted only to go by his first name, Adolph. "It's not like we've built gas chambers. Sheesh, people sure get uptight."
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
A good library has only enough recordkeeping to prevent line-jumping and to enforce time limits.
Most that I've been in just ask you to put down a first name and last initial, some require a full name. They shred the sign-up sheets at the end of the day.
Those that require more usually are NOT allowing just anyone in, for example, they may only allow library-card-holders access, or may require you to be an adult to access "uncensored" machines. But that's more the exception than the rule.
I've heard of libraries that use a "take a number" system instead of a sign-up system. This can eliminate all id-recordkeeping even if you do have to show a library card or proof of age to get a number.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
So let me get this straight. The arguement for this is that it's there to verify the identity of people using the library computers... except if they object in which case an employee will log them in instead, at which point there is no identity verification.
So, we're creating a database of library patrons' fingerprints at a cost of $40,000 of taxpayer money, creating potentially serious privacy issues, so we can verify the identity of those library patrons who choose to volunteer their fingerprints. How does this make any sense? This is like saying "You need an ID to come in the front door... unless you don't want to give an ID in which case we'll just let you in".
Something here doesn't wash.
It occurred to me that this country is spending an awful lot of money on security measures. Be it library finger-print scanners or expensive new security measures at airports, we seem to have a "spare no expense" approach to making everyone and everything safe.
The problem is whenever a new security measure is implemented, it almost always seems to be a gross inconvenience--be it time, dignity or a loss of privacy--to the 99% of the people who have done nothing and do not intend to do anything wrong. What's worse, the real criminals eventually discover ways to get around those security measures, making their presence little more then an expensive pain in the butt for the average law abiding citizen.
And yet, despite the billions of dollars America is pumping into security measures that put out the honest citizens, when it comes down to doing real law enforcement resources are always being stretched. Get scammed on eBay for $500? Sorry, our department really doesn't have the manpower to investigate the crime and bring it to prosecution.
It seems to me that a dollar spent on investigating crimes, catching criminals and putting them behind bars would ultimately be a better deterrent to crime then spending a dollar that does little more then put up a road block that criminals eventually find a way around but manages to piss off honest folks.
The Internet is generally stupid
I live three blocks from the main branch of the Naperville public library... I'll be interested to see how the new toys affect lab usage, as well as how many folks ask others to log them in to get around the biometrics. I have a feeling that lab usage patterns, at least for most folks, will not change much (fortunately, this doesn't affect me, since I don't depend on the library for access to teh Intarweb).
GP: For you youngsters, "red" Used to mean "Communist Fuckers".
;x
P: I still think red is bad
Yeah, for pretty much the same reasons.
I can use my middle finger for the print.
No Nyarlathotep, No Chaos
Know Nyarlathotep, Know Chaos
Do they need fingerprints to prevent children from checking out material unsuitable for children? If "the children!" is their real concern, why don't they just check age? All the public libraries I go to have a separate section for children, with computers. Simply don't allow children to use computers in the adult area.
And if the kids are getting these passwords from friends and relatives, then there's your problem, and nothing stops the friends/relatives from logging them in, or buying them porn, or buying them alcohol. Believe it or not, stuff like this happens.
Yet the solution you like is locking down the entire internet, since that is natual progression of your argument. Otherwise the kids could just go next door to the cafe with free wireless that does not require fingerprints. Great, now we need govt regulated fingerprint-only access to the internets... Think of the children! Won't you do it for the children?!
Despite state issued ID, kids still get alcohol, and kids still get laid. The govt can not protect you from poor parenting. At least a human scanning IDs for age can't track your activities.
I can see Stalin rolling in his grave... laughing. *Shakes head* And we used to laugh at the Soviets. I've heard many Americans look at the Soviets or the Nazis and say "That could never happen here". Don't be so sure, it already is...
Lies about crimes
It's not so much a random number seeded by the fingerprint, as it is a hash of the fingerprint. Security of hashed personal data is an issue, the same way that security of a hashed password file is an issue. Yes, you can't reconstruct the original passwords from the hashed values, but if an attacker has the hashed values there are ways to compromise the system's security. In particular, someone with access to a true fingerprint database (i.e. police/FBI) should be able to apply the same 15-point process to it and generate numbers that can be matched against the library 'bar codes'. The fact that the 'bar codes' do not encode the entire fingerprint does not really do much to increase privacy protection.
Bet she uses your face for identification.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Also you will most likely be supervised while tying your biometric data to your card, not out of mistrust, but because most people will need help using the scanner for the first time.
Bruce Schneier is going to beat you bloody with your stupid library card. Repeat after me: authentication is not security. Identification is not even authentication! And to clinch it, authentication is not even required to use library resources inside the library. It is only required to remove those resources from the premises, which does not apply to the computers.
Do you even know why it is illegal for others to use your Social Security number as an identification number?
in order to promote good hygene practices among the patrons, they will be subjected to mandatory enemas at least once every five(5) visits to the library.
The library staff promises the enema temperature will be in the pleasant range of the body temperatures.
Also, in an effort to fight the war on terror and increase security, all patrons will be required to provide their SSN and a valid bank account number (how do we know you are who you claim you are unless you prove to us that you are, or we prove to you that you are not).
The library staff (again) promises that it will not disclose this information but to the highest bidder.
(I am so glad I come from a country that they still throw Molotov cocktails at the cops and their Riot Control Squads...)
Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
Why is it necessary to ensure that the people who are using the computers are who they say they are? Is there a problem with criminal activity being perpetrated via the library's computers?
How will the library verify that the IDs that are presented are not counterfeit in the first place? Will they be coordinating with the Secretary of State or are they relying solely on the honesty of the patron?
IM!HO, someone's on a power trip and the people who use the library are buying the ticket.
That's nothing compared to what's right around the corner now. The gubmint has been fingerprinting foreign nationals entering the U.S. for some time now. In a short while they will also be fingerprinting them on the way out as well. In Iraq, the military routinely rounds up people in the streets and not only fingerprints them at the start of their detention, but does retinal scans on them too and takes pictures of them for entry into a database. This is happening on a large scale. The fact that none of these people actually has any connection to Al Qaida doesn't seem to matter.
All it takes is for Congress to give the word and the fingerprint-the-foreigners policy could be used on American citizens as well at the nations airports. That will happen within a few years, I have no doubt about it. Congress has already mandated a national ID card for everyone. U.S. passports will contain biometric information starting later this year. The military is gaining a lot of experience and knowledge in how to round people up and get them into The System en masse.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Too bad Americans have been asleep at the switch for so long. We are already past the point of no return with respect to the loss of so many liberties we took for granted.
A national disgrace, I'm sure.
Which 15 points? Chances are, this information wont be available to anyone except those who should have that info, so if someone is trying to build this information up on their own then they have to work out WHICH 15 points are used - granted there is an infinite number of points which make up a fingerprint, which makes it a less than trivial task.
Law enforcement will probabl;y have access to this info, and rightly they should - what expectation of privacy do you have when accessing public equipment that is the subject of a legal investigation?
And so is the rest of the world!
When the fascists come to round up the dissidents, they'll be armed with library databases!
So, instead of creating a random number with the unix timestamp as a seed, they are creating a random number with your fingerprint as a seed. What is so shocking about that?....There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers.
This sure sounds innocent and I'm sure its meant to be, but there is certainly possible abuses which could occur. They store those 15 or more fingerprint points (after converting to a number presumably with some crpyto algorithum). When you want to log into a computer a finger print reader takes your fingerprint again and the same process (converting to numbers) happens. These are then matched up to verify who you are.
The problem is if each "encryption" of the "data" equals the same result then it CAN be used for otherthings. They don't need to actually store your fingerprint anywhere. Patriot-Act could let law enforcement use this database of numerical "fingerprints". All they have to do is feed thier database of fingerprints (or those from a crime scene etc) through the same software as was used to originally "encrypt" the library fingerprints, compare the numbers, and if the numbers match they got their guy. This doesn't require a REAL fingerprint. As long as everytime a fingerprint is put through the algorithim it gives the same result, having the ACTUAL fingerprint on file isn't much of an issue.
"reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
That is quite easy. It is blatantly Unconstitutional for public libraries to be censoring information. Remove the filters (which the ALA has been fighting to do since the idea was first proposed) and you remove the need for identification.
Using the library is not criminal behavior.
What is so shocking about this is that I don't trust them. How can I be sure that they are telling me the truth and my entire fingerprint isn't stored in the system ?
How can I be sure that the system haven't been cracked and someone hasn't intercepted the picture of my fingerprint before the 15 points were extracted and the rest discarded ?
How can I be sure that they still only take 15 points or that another organization that jumped in the bandwaggon is also only using 15 points ? Read the fucking licensing agreemend before each time I put my thumb there ?
Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
I think the article just explained this rather bizarre move.
Naperville library officials [...]
The scanners, made by Naperville-based U.S. Biometrics [...]
Both in Naperville. How coincidental. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if U.S. Biometrics wandered into the library offices and said "y'know, if you buy our fingerprint scanners we might be willing to donate a fat wad of cash to the library. We'll even discount 'em for you."
Why else would a library -- likely strapped for cash, as most are -- suddenly feel the need for (expensive) biometrics hardware out of the blue?
I'm missing your point completely. Your scenario is that I can decide to be a hacker. I hack into the FBI and get a list of everyone's fingerprint. I then hack into the library and get all the fingerprint hashes. I compare fingerprints to fingerprint hashes and I figure out who you are. And then...?
Wouldn't it have been a hell of a lot easier to just grab your name and address off the library's server when I was hacking that? Why mess with all the fingerprint junk?
As for concerns about 'hash security', isn't that what john-the-ripper is used for? Just because you can brute-force a password algorithm doesn't make it insecure. From the data provided, this is the equivalent of a 15-character password hash. The best password crackers can take months to crack 10-character password hashes. Then, even if they do figure out that a certain sequence of fingerprint identities matches up a specific hash - what? They somehow clone a finger and alter the dna to create your fingerprint so they can use the computer at the library?
What is the whole point!? I simply don't get it. This is *NOT* a case of the library storing fingerprints. This is a case of the library using fingerprints for a second or so to create a unique ID that cannot be converted back into a fingerprint.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
And if there's one thing they like doing, it's spending tons of $ on flashy, useless stuff.
Like that amazing Carillon tower (giant bell tower) that they decided was a good use of millions of $ of taxpayer cash. It never gets played. Totally useless, but IT'S THE BIGGEST ONE FOR HUNDRED OF MILES AROUND, LOOK AT US!
PS - I spent like half my life up to age 18 checking out books from the fantastic Naperville Library System, it's a shame they're doing this, but I'm not at all suprised. They want to look like technological leaders.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
They're providing this "service" for the benefit of DHS. Experimental and "voluntary" for now. Expect all public libraries to be required to implement these later. Your gov't wants to track everybody. You can also expect National Geographic to cough up all that DNA data to the gov't when that little experiment is done. There will be a subpoena forthcoming. Then you all will be perfectly safe. Trust me :-)
What?
AC Speaks TRUE!
I can just see the lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act now:
"I have no fingers, you insensitive clod!"
Seriously - what if you have no meaningful fingerprints - you have no hands, or your fingers had been burned and thus have no meaningful prints, etc. ?
What do they print then? And do the rest of us want to be in the room at the time?
www.eFax.com are spammers
Another town in suburban American that thinks it can go where everyone else has already realized that there is nothing there but disappointment and failure...
. . . that sales of gummi candy will see a significant increase in that town.
r s_defeat_fingerprint_sensors/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/05/16/gummi_bea
That's not the problem. The problem comes when my bank installs the same fingerprint scanner - now the library record and my bank record have the same database key, the same "account number" if you will.
And how long do you think it will be before fake fingerprints are available to anyone and everyone?
I went through a period of fascination with detective-stuff when I was a kid (too many Hardy Boys books) and learned how to lift latent prints using nothing more complicated than Scotch Tape. Getting ahold of someone else's prints is child's play.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Patriot-Act could let law enforcement use this database of numerical "fingerprints".
Read the USA PATRIOT Act before stating what it can and cannot do. The USA PATRIOT Act's provisions for public/small business records access comes from the USA Act, which comes from FISA (passed in 1978). In order to access those records, an investigator has to go to FISC and convince a panel of judges that you are suspected of espionage, terrorism, or drug smuggling AND you have not committed a crime that would allow for a search warrant AND letting you know that they want to search those records would allow you to delete data that they want to see. Finally, when they look at it, they have a time limit, set by the FISC, for letting you know what they looked for and what they found.
That doesn't sound much to me like the USA PATRIOT Act lets law enforcement just wander into a library and dump all the data they have.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
...evil acid spitting terrorists will just BUY "Bombs for Dummies" from the local book store, for cash.
The library taking a stand like this gives me slightly more confidence in trusting them with biometric data.
Sorry, but no matter how you look at it, there is absolutely NO rational basis that would justify a PUBLIC library requesting or retaining biometric data- AT ALL. IT doesn't matter what their policy is...policies can be broken, ignored, or whatever. The important thing that people need to remember is that once the cat is out of the bag, for all intents and purposes, it's out for good. You have no control over it.
The only thing a PUBLIC library should be concerned with is a way to contact me- I present an acceptable ID, they get an address and phone number, I get a library card. That's it.
A library in Fort Bend County (Houston, TX) requires a digital scan of your fingerprint to get access to the public computers as well.
Use a gummy finger
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
At $63 million, it's the most expensive public high school ever built in Illinois.
And you're being pretty defensive about the right-wing thing. Was the original poster saying that the town was fucked up because it was right wing? Or fucked up because it was rich? Or rich and right-wing because it was fucked up? Or fucked up and right wing because it was rich?
I don't see any "liberal" (what the hell does that word even mean anymore?) school districts finger-printing you in order to use a library PC.
"In today's news, a terrorist bombing in Boston killed 300 people. The bombing was apparently planned in part by a man using a library computer to communicate with other conspirators over the internet.
"Local authorities want to reassure the public that, thanks to security upgrades at the library, we can be sure that the bomber's fingerprints match the name on his fake driver's license."
We're wanted men. I have the death sentence in 12 systems!
When they outlaw anonymity only outlaws will be anonymous.
Outlaws might also be one of the few able to protect their identity.
Between this sort of thing and the whole impending National ID, a Heinlein quote comes to mind:
" When a place gets crowded enough to require ID's, social collapse is not far away. It is time to go elsewhere."
Now that's a death ray!
when they pry my fingers from my cold dead hand.
It's not like fingerprints are hard to fake anyway.
Just see here.
Ummm, are they taking section 215 of a (hopefully) expiring Patriot Act as some kind of hint?
What happened to our library mavens, ardently protecting our rights?
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought libraries were supposed to be a repository of knowledge, available to ALL citizens, regardless of status. Fingerprinting could be one step nearer to restriction of freedom of information. When we all have access to all information the better the world will be.
As others here have said, these measures will not stop any individual seriously intent on harm. They will only impede and upset the average user, not to say the disabled who have more of a need of free access than the rest of us.
*sigh* when will all this crap about biometrics end?
You can manipulate hashed data without having any real clue what the hash really means. All it takes is a mysql/sqlplus prompt and a little SQL knowledge.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You can (potentially) circumvent this with the method described in this link.
In fact, this appears so easy to circumvent, that one would almost think that the RIAA came up with it as a copy protection scheme! 8)=
Here is a list of the Representatives that voted for Real IDs. It passed unanimously in the Senate.
The point is that it's like a hash. As long as each fingerprint system uses different points to make the number, then getting your number from one of the systems won't allow that person to somehow reconstruct your fingerprint for use in, say, your bank.
I still hate the idea, since it seems terribly excessive to require a fingerprint to use computers in a public library, but at least this one value won't "open all the doors" if someone maliciously obtains it.
I wonder how many people that would truly be concerned with this, even use libraries. The one's that know enough about our current technology, and it's pros and cons don't seem like the types to need libraries. We have Slashdot!
Go here http://www.naperville-lib.org/onlineform/comment.h tm and let them know how you feel about it!!
>>to install fingerprint scanners on 130 computers
... KNOPPIX! [/fanfare]
>>with Internet access or a time limit on usage.
[fanfare] This is a job for
No they cannot just wander over and demand it, but they can get a court order from a secret panal of judges (are they actual judges, for some reason I thought I heard them just refered to as "administrative over-sight commitees" either way not important to my point) and then get the records.
I'm not an expert of Patriot-Act or really care about this situtation as I don't see a big problem myself. Just saying, just because you don't store the actual prints doesn't really mean anything.
"reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
"Beyond a critical point within a finite space, freedom diminishes as numbers increase. ...The human question is not how many can possibly survive within the system, but what kind of existence is possible for those who do survive."
Frank Herbert
The reason to obscure your ssn, dob, etc is to prevent other
people from using them.
The reason to keep your fingerprint id private is to prevent
yourself from becoming a suspect in random crimes simply
because a couple of bits from your fingerprint hash match
those found at some crime scene.
This sort of scheme actually increases the likelyhood
of some cop smashing down your door looking for kidpron.
Personally, everyone born in this country should be fingerprinted and have their DNA on record. Those who really think it's a privacy issue, well, should move elsewhere. Being able to identify your population at a moments notice would be helpful.
You could use your print to identify you in almost every circumstance. As far as a library requiring fingerprints - I'm all for it. Don't like it? Go use a PC somewhere else. You still have your own freedom of choice.
While Neuqua Valley is not the most expensive high school built on a per student basis (about $20K per student, 3100 students at full capacity), I challenge you to find a American public high school with a contstruction greater than Neuqua's $62 million.
PS - According to the Wikipedia article you linked to, "In addition, it is considered poor form to invoke the law explicitly."
You also failed to take into account "Quirk's Exception" to Godwin's Law, which is "Intentional invocation of this so-called 'Nazi Clause' is ineffectual." =)
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Doesn't sound too bad. While it is believed that no 2 humans have the same fingerprint, it will be hard to convince a jury that no 2 humans share 15 points.
Still seems like a waste of money however.
...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
You speak pretty authoritatively for someone who left 10 years ago. Care to provide chapter and verse on any of this, particularly the high school hell you describe?
FWIW, Keyes registered address was in the south 'burbs (South Holland, if I recall correctly), as those of us who actually had to live through the fiasco know. In truth, Alan seemed to spend most of his time in Illinois giving news conferences downtown or at O'Hare, so whatever his address was, it was probably irrelevant. Given that he got whalloped more than 2:1 in the Naperville townships, I'd say he probably wouldn't have considered it his base.
Incidentally, same election shows Dubya carrying the township by ~3.5K votes out of 39K cast. They've certainly got their conservatives there, but it's a bit more balanced than you apparently think.
The moral here? Find some more constructive way to vent your high-school angst. For others actually thinking this guy's picture is accurate, just...no, it isn't.
(For the record, yes, the library idea is pretty foolish.)
(Also...yes, I am probably getting way too steamed over this. But to see this modded "Informative" is ridiculous. At least some of the other ranting here on 'Da Dot is semi-entertaining at times...)
If the police had half a brain, they'd realize that someone surfing kiddie porn from a library is not always going to be using their own genuine account. Whereas if they don't have a brain, giving them more power is not a good idea.
I paint a different nightmare scenario for you. Some guy comes in during the day with a copy of your library card. He does the finger-scan thing and it gives the wrong number. Chances are this is not an unheard of occurrence, so the nice librarian lets him in anyway. He then goes and surfs child porn. This time, the cops can claim they have your fingerprint, proving it was definately, certainly, absolutely no one but you--since the fingerprinting machine doesn't keep records on you, you have no way to claim that they don't.
You think that kind of crap doesn't happen? When I was in high school I had people say they caught me on camera for stuff that I not only didn't do, but our school had exactly TWO CAMERAS, both of which were directly in front of the office, where they'd be accusing me of setting fire to something in the gym. Of course, they systematically refuse to show the "tapes," claiming that the evidence is so strong they shouldn't have to. Don't laugh, a lot of authority-minded people THINK like that. In their mind they're doing the right thing, so it doesn't matter how irrational they are.
Haven't you ever had someone just flat out get mad at you for no reason? Watch them convince themselves that you did something? Imagine if that person was a cop. Imagine it's an airport security guy. And imagine he doesn't think anything he does to you or pins on you could be wrong, because in his mind you're guilty of something.
The reason that we limit security and police authority in the name of freedom is to protect the innocent from security forces and police. People are corrupt, self-centered, irrational idiots. That means that criminals and coppers alike will also be corrupt, self-centered, irrational idiots. Sure, there are plenty of exceptions, but those aren't the people you need to worry about.
In this case in particular, I don't see why you need this kind of security in a library. I fear an ulterior motive; they may say it's to prevent book theft or whatever now, but in two years congress will pass a law enabling the FBI to use it in surveillance. This also happens. A lot. So I say if there isn't a clear, pressing need that it addresses efficiently without collateral damage, do not do it. I see no need (you can't exactly get anthrax at a library) and I do see danger.
All Hail the Maggott Show
I didn't sign up for the article, and didn't see it mentioned... but how are individuals without fingers supposed to access the computer? I'm not sure how often this thing comes up, but aren't libraries supposed to be required to have alternant means for access for the disabled? Like wheelchair ramps, or doors wide enough for a wheelchair to pass through. If they establish this, they are automatically excluding those without fingers!!!... I guess they're also going to have to install voice recognition hardware as well. (Also, i have no idea how a fingerless person would use a computer in the first place, but we're talking about the principle of the matter)
From TFA:
Library officials say the added security is necessary to ensure people who are using the computers are who they say they are.
Okay, I'll bite. Why is this "necessary"? Are there really that many people using library computers to break the law? Couldn't we just let people use the computers anonymously and not worry about who they are?
The article cites a couple of reasons for the scanners, like keeping kids from borrowing a friends card to get around a parental ban on adult sites, but that hardly seems to justify this sort of drastic solution.
It's the land of the brave, and the home of the free
Where the less you know, the better off you'll be.
After glancing at some of the posts, i decided to shoot out my 2 cents. Naperville is a town that has way to much money, and loves to sacrifice other peoples rights so they can look good on paper. I'm 22 and I lived there from 14 on to 20, I live in bolingbrook now, about 10 minutes away from them (sorry to lie in my subject line). My experience in that town is a horrid one. The people that live there are more concerned about what everyone else is doing instead of their own lives. If you go to their website, these people have so much sand in their vaginas that the police will give you a radar scanner to catch speeders. Let me add that there are already too many cops in that town. I lived on a circle that was off of a non-busy street, and some fat skank 2 blocks away bitched at city hall long enough, that they removed our lane marking lines. why? this is almost an exact quote, i saw it on our public access channel. "Well we feel that the lane lines give the street a highway type feel, and that encourages speeding. If we remove the lane lines we will increase the safety of the street because drivers will have to drive slower to be certain of their lane position in the street." Effin retarded if you ask me. Another point to mention, is that there are more undercover squad cars in that town than marked ones. or at least they patrol more frequently in unmarked cars. Since i've been 16, i have spotted at least 30 different undercover police vehicles. The town also has a helicopter. Why on earth does the town need an effin helicopter? I can drive from one part of town to the other in about 15 minutes (and i don't have lights and sirens) thats less time than it would take to prep the helicopter to take off. This is all to deter the "crime" that plagues naperville. All that is are a bunch of teens and college students. Sure there was the crazy bitch who poisoned her kids, and the other guy who killed his wife, but that happens everywhere. I was one of the top ranking criminals in the town, and all i did was take drugs and bash a few mailboxes. This whole thing is all based on paper. If the town spends money on something that they say benefits the town, then all the new mothers can say "oh i feel so much safer" and all the middle aged people can go "thats great! the crime in this town is horrible" even though they don't even have crime. I'm the one who lives in bolingbrook and is surrounded by welfare recipients and have about 40 unsupervised 8-14 year olds walking my streets destroying my house and property, oh and burning my mail. I know most of the cops that work my beat by name. Its just sad. sorry to rant, but naperville should be eliminated from the state of Illinois. Its all just a bunch of scared lil pompous assholes. Oh and a sidenote, if you have a mohawk or have died your hair any different colors, don't go near the town, they call the cops on you because your hair is different. I had some fun during that period of my life. eck....
Ok this reeks of tin foil hat. All of you need to get over yourselves. How dare the US issue me a SSN to uniquely ID me, or how could the State give me a Driver ID number to provide me some form of ID that is unique to everyone else.
/. and go live in the woods.
What I don't get is why is everyone tossing a fit about a figer print scanner? Let's say you use your current library card (which I'm not sure how it works were you live.) Here, the card has a barcode on the back on it. Now if someone really wanted to they could look through the System and use my library card to find all the books I've read. Chances of it actually occouring? Next to nothing. I just don't see myself that importnat that someone is really going to look over my flipping study habits. And if they did, fine, it's not like I'm reading, "How to make a bomb to blow the frigging White house up 101."
Besides this is for Internet use anyway. It's not like libraries don't already have measures to track what you're looking at anyway.
Using a fingerprint isn't going to make it easier to track who is reading stuff that is dangerious. No that would be some sort of tracking database that reads what your are reading. Good God. What will happen when they start issuing Credit cards that use your finger print? Or start making doors that use finger prints?
You guys need to take the tin foil hats off and breath a little. If you want to keep private then I suggest you not post to
Thank god I own my own computer. All hail open access points!!
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Years ago I borrowed a book from my local library and found a very personal letter tucked in it -- after scanning the first few lines it was clearly something the person who had used it as a bookmark would not want to lose or fall into other people's hands. A love letter. A guarded peak revealed no identifying data like an address or last name.
So I put the letter in an envelope, sealed it, and hiked down to the library.
I told the librarian what I had found, and asked her to contact the person who had borrowed the book and tell them they'd left something in it. She replied "Oh, no, I can't do that. We destroy the borrowing records as soon as the book is returned, so nobody can check up on what you are reading. Doing otherwise would be a breach of professional ethics."
I was impressed. What a great country, I thought, where our public institutions protect our right of privacy.
Maybe this is part of the "Everything" that our political leaders tell us has changed since 9/11.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The whole point of using a library internet terminal is to be anonymous!
"Right now we give you a library card with a bar code attached to it. This is just a bar code, but it's built in," said Mark West, the library's deputy director."
Here is an idea... use the barcode to allow access top the computer. Just like checking out a book. The barcode scanner is a lot cheaper than a biometric device not mention the fact that the library card is a unique identifier.
"Naperville library officials said the technology cannot be used to reconstruct a person's actual fingerprint. The scanners, made by Naperville-based U.S. Biometrics Corp., use an algorithm to convert 15 or more specific points into a unique numeric sequence."
Hmm... the library is in Naperville and the company that makes the scanner is also in Naperville? What a coincidence!
It doesn't work that way. We tried to make a system similar to this for a medical insurance company, but the points are *not* unique. Not by a long shot. So they will find a match, in fact they will find tens of thousands of matches. One of them might even be you.
Just like DNA tests, it's useful for confirming identity, but useless for finding an identity.
I had both my arms blown off in Nam, you insensitive clod!
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
What bothers me about this: whom does this really impact? People use library computers for two reasons: First, because they have no other computer to use. Second, because they want a certain amount of anonymity.
By requiring fingerprints to use this resource the library is saying two things simultaneously: (1) if you don't have your own computer (i.e. if you're poor), you are not trustworthy, and (2) if you are interested in anonymity, you must be doing something terribly wrong.
Both of these are patently un-American statements.
Library cards are used so the library can track inventory and penalize people who hold books too long. This new policy has nothing to do with tracking inventory and everything to do with limiting freedom.
It may be that the library directors are worried about their personal liability under the USA PATRIOT Act if Bad Guys use the computers. If that's the case, I wish they would just say it. They'd have my sympathy. But pretending that this is just like the library card's barcode is disingenuous.
Every American concerned with "freedom for all" must be against policies like this.
He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
You should add "G4" to the blurb
[Seems OT, but it honestly isn't]The last Star Wars prequel is one of the most inspiring things I've seen out of Hollywood in a long, long time. It gave me hope. The dialog is mostly sub-par (as usual), but the plot and morals are dead-on relevant to modern America. I don't think that we're past the point of no return yet; not when a mainstream movie like this can get away with such blatant satire of democracy and patriotism.
"We shall change into the first Galactic Empire for a safe and secure society."
"So this is how freedom dies - to thunderous applause."
""You're either with me or against me."
"Only a Sith deals in such absolutes."
(Anyone with functioning brain should realize that Lucas is saying that Bush is no better than a Sith.)
It's not that these sentiments are new or radical; it's that they're present in one of the best-hyped mass market franchises of all time. Joe Sixpack will watch this movie! With his kids! Hell, I almost wish that this movie was rated PG, so that more kids will see it. Sitheven puts it in the context of Judeo-Christian style morality, which should make it even easier for the unwashed masses to digest.
I don't think it's too late for us. We who actually recognize and remember the true spirit of America (distrust of and freedom from our government) would do well to recomend this movie to our more trusting, sheep-like friends. It's like 1984, but with enough explosions to keep the audience interested.
I still wish we could've seen Jar-Jar's bloody head was splattered against the camera, and I really wish Lucas would get someone else to do his dialog (Vader: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" *sounds of audience retching*), but if you can look past these flaws, it really is an awesome, insightful, RELEVANT movie.
First off, it's a public library so unless you're taking the computer home, they shouldn't care who you are. The only practical reason I can think of that would cause them to want this technology is if they're worried about spammers or illegal use of the computer. The better(cheaper) solution is to get a sys admin to put a firewall(and other software) in to lock it down and shut the problem off at the source. If you get the fingerprint, great you arrested the guy but the damage is already done. The next guy will be there before the court case goes to trial. Which, by the way will cost the library more money.
netkev.com
How can I be sure they haven't been dusting the books themselves?
How can I be sure of anything when I'm as paranoid as you?
Some links here and here.
i would be much more concerned with what the gov and its agencies do "legitimately" with the information. information sharing and scope creep is the name of the game in the usa these days. just think "total information awareness" and so on...
sum.zero
Okay, it's unique, right. Ooh, that's good because it means that sequence will identify only me. Then the stupid/evil (I can't decide which), tells em,
Are we really so stupid that we believe that? Why doesn't the journalist ask if other fingerprints can also be turned into a unique numerical sequence? Let me see, how hard would it be to convert the fingerprint database into the same unique numerical sequence. Whether that sequence can be used to reconstruct the fingerprint is largely academic; they are using a unique biometric identifier that the FBI can secretly request and compare to their database.
Honestly, going to a biometric system like this for computer access at a library is completely over the top. If I were in the area, I'd picket the damn library. I won't be surprised to see the biometric scanners stolen or destroyed within days of their installation.
The library's motto should be: Read at your own risk.
And this is important to know because...
Okay, they make the case that it identified the perp of a criminal act that included using the computer. A weak point, but I'll have to give them that one.
The stored numeric data cannot be used to reconstruct a fingerprint, West said, nor can it be cross-referenced with other fingerprint databases such as those kept by the FBI or the Illinois State Police.
Not unless the other police agencies start using the same system, in which case each should come up with the same unique identifying number, wouldn't you bet?
Officials promise to protect the confidentiality of the fingerprint records.
Don't know about you, but I'd feel a lot better if they stated just how long they planed to maintain these records, and how they would be destroyed afterwards. That is truly a missing piece of information in the original article.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
.. and just follow the instructions.
How to fake fingerprints.
I happen to live in Naperville only a few blocks from Nichols library. Does it seem like an invasion of privacy that they're going to keep some sort of fingerprint database? Well, yes. And I wouldn't put it past the local government of this self-important yuppie town to sell us, its citizens, out.
Then again, most of us of a certain age might be screwed anyways on this sort of invasion of privacy. Remember in the 80's when everyone was all paranoid about kidnappings? It was standard practice to have police fingerprinting days at local grade schools back then...but looking back, I can't view this as anything else but treating the younger generations as potential criminals.
How is the potential for abuse any different here, when an abuse of the system isn't likely to be publicized much in the same way other nasty aspects of this town--like rapes on the riverwalk near downtown. This is the town that you get a jaywalking ticket for getting hit in a crosswalk if you happen to be an African American College Student. Why would I beleive that the City isn't going to screw me with this in the future, given the opportunity?
And to answer your next question, yes, I am sick of this fucking town.
As for concerns about 'hash security', isn't that what john-the-ripper is used for? Just because you can brute-force a password algorithm doesn't make it insecure. From the data provided, this is the equivalent of a 15-character password hash. The best password crackers can take months to crack 10-character password hashes. Then, even if they do figure out that a certain sequence of fingerprint identities matches up a specific hash - what? They somehow clone a finger and alter the dna to create your fingerprint so they can use the computer at the library?
Heh, insightful my ass. Sure, brute-forcing the hash of a 10 character password might take a while, but what if someone chose a poor hashing algorithm (check out the FMS attacks on WEP? What if I have a dictionary of precalculated hashes for known passwords (FBI fingerprint database anyone)? Using a modern computer, I can do a hash-to-hash comparison of hundreds of thousands of entries a second. Check out my other posts as to how this could be used.
...and this news of biometric identification in the library is nothing. What has me far more concerned is the fact that the local tanning beds have had this technology long before our libraries. Yes, you heard correct, when I go every now and again to ensure my latent onset of cancer, I have to be identified by fingerprint. And personally, I'm terrified of that information getting out; god only knows what the government could do with the knowledge that I use a level 2 bed for 15 minutes every now and again (I have sensitive skin, give me break).
"Progress comes from the intelligent use of experience."
> In order to access those records, an investigator has to go to FISC and convince a panel of judges
> that you are suspected of espionage, terrorism, or drug smuggling AND you have not committed a crime
> that would allow for a search warrant AND letting you know that they want to search those records
> would allow you to delete data that they want to see.
And with the Patriot act, getting the judge to approve a warrant is basically a rubber stamp. A judge has to have a very strong reason to disallow a warrant, instead of the police needing a strong reason to ask for one.
jfs
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
I live 10 minutes from the town, folks. The parent poster is not exagurating.
They only aid in ID theft...
This is a case of the library using fingerprints for a second or so to create a unique ID that cannot be converted back into a fingerprint.
If that is the case, then why don't they just use some other unique number, akin to Mickeysoft's (or anybody else's) GUID? Why do they need your fingerprint?
This is how the collection of biometric data will happen. It will not be one big scheme, in with a bang. It will creep from the most innocuous places. So sure, first, the library won't record the actual print. Then they will. Then the authorities will come along (gov pays for libraries in the US, right?) and take a copy. By then we'll be used to the process, and we'll be too engrossed in the latest entertainment product to care.
I thought Section 215 allowed them to pretty much do that (demand library records) with very little justification or oversight.
Oh, you mean Section 215 - the section which allows the Director of the FBI to demand records without any oversight except the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees? Yes. Isn't it funny how the ACLU keeps their analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act vague enough to make it seem that anyone can get any information without any oversight at all.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
is for your benefit... imagine the possibilities when the haptic rectal scanner technology is perfected: "sit here please"
This just sucks. We are all going to end-up is some far-removed camp for a bull-shit reason; just for the persuit of some idealized society and lifestyle that doesn't exists. These authoritative measures ruin the lives of both the subjects and masters. It is disconcerting that wisdom seems to be a virtue of the past.
You can't ! This is why you have to post as AC !
Naperville's libraries have in the past stood up for patrions' privacy.
Not to long ago, some teen's reported to a librarian that a man was fondling himself at the computer terminal. The libary called the police, who suited up the SWAT team and sent them to the library. At the library, the officers demanded the information on the person in question, including a list of websites he has visited (an obvious thing for someone accused of masterbating in public at a PC). The librarians response: "Do you have a court order?"
Many librarians have expressed concern over privacy, fighting issues on the Patriot act and the Broadcast Flag (FCC issue). While not a whole sale believe whatever they say, I am inclined to trust them when they say they would defend privacy.
Naperville is a very well-off community. I HIGHLY doubt that their library is in any way "strapped for cash". I wouldn't be surprised if the library went to U.S. Biometrics to begin with.
You can tell how well their library system is doing just by seeing what their buildings look like. Not to judge a book by its cover or anything...
1, 2, 3, 4, 5... That's the combination on my luggage!
Consider law enforcement having the fingerprint of a
suspect but no record of the fingerprint in their
database. How much money would they throw at
creating an artificial finger with this print and
then try it out at the library. Will the computer
system at the library greet them with their full
name? At which point they have the identity of
the print. May cost them a thousand dollars but they have it. If not greeted by the suspects name in the libraries computer perhaps all the officer (who is undercover) has to do is abuse the network and be greeted by the sysadmin as "Mr. Doe" at
which point the name has been revealed once again.
Just a thought.
I live in naperville. The irony here is, at least as of two days ago, I was able to take my powerbook in, and enjoy open, unfiltered, wireless access. Thank god for blowing my tax dollars on stuff other than books, to provide an illusion of security!
What is so shocking about this is that I don't trust them. How can I be sure that they are telling me the truth and my entire fingerprint isn't stored in the system ?
It does not matter anyway, grand-parent is wrong. Unless the fingerprint points are also random (I'd assume this would create a whole lot of non-unique sequences) then it can be reversed.
The grand-parent must also be unaware of the lack of network security in libraries. Look for articles pertaining to Dynix. They would need to use an entire separate, off-line computer system for the scanners. I'm not an IT guy, but I bet this would cost a bit more than integrating it into previously existing infrastructure.
Turns out internet->library security is dangerous whether they fingerprint or not, as getting a library card requires (at least where I live) a good deal of personal information.
Hmmm, there is a similarly unique pattern on the head of the male human penis. Maybe we ought to use that for our "fingerprinting".
A good reason to enter into a willy-waving contest..!
Don't expect a public outcry since most of the library users are vagrants anyways.
Others may have said this already but anyway something seems EXTREMELY fishy here..
Naperville library officials said...
The scanners, made by Naperville-based U.S. Biometrics Corp....
Are other libraries in the US even thinking about any type of technology in this manner? I may have on my tin foil hat on but it seems to me someone at the Naperville Biometrics Corp has a really good relationship with someone in the Naperville Library or the Naperville city council.
What a way for a town to showcase the work of a local company. Yeah..
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
What's funny is how many right-wing screw-your-liberty-cuz-I'm-scared assholes read exactly alike on the subject. Is there a Dittoheads prepared responses site or are y'all just linked realtime with one of those invasive technologies y'all are always trying to cram down everyone's throat?
What happened to the Wendy's chille finger?
There may be a new market in taxidermified human (maybe chimp fingers would work ) in a key chain, just like the old rabbits foot.
Hmmmm
* Carthago Delenda Est *
How about just some fingerprint dust near the computer and a Jell-O finger?
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
Grave robberies are up 20% and dazed and confused senior citizens are missing from the home..
Btw.. technically.. your whole frickin' DNA is "just a barcode" too..
The road between democracy and tyranny is paved with secrecy in the name of security.
Wonder what happens for anyone without any prints to offer? Amputees, thalidomide victims? Is this decision discriminatory? Do they make exceptions in these cases? If so, what is the point of the whole project? Maybe they think those with no hands and feet make bad terrorists. Y'know, say what you like about that most 20th Century of ID systems, but everyone tends to have a face.
I think you're missing the point somewhat. Why is it so god damned necessary that the police be able to personally identify you based on library usage in the first place? I'd rather have that plausible deniability there - "It might not have been me, someone could easily have stolen my card." In fact, I'd much RATHER just have library access be completely and totally anonymous.
Oh, and on another note - is it just me or is the invocation of Child Porn becoming a new Godwin's Law? Is there an epidemic of people stealing library cards to surf for child porn in public or something? ;)
rrrrrrrr, shitty little plagerist.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
What if Bin Laden isn't the terrorist he is today?
What if the Patriot Act wasn't enacted?
Would there still be such a huge uproar about privacy and the fear of Big Brother? Suppose history took a different path, wouldn't such technology have a positive effect on society? Think about the times you have forgotten your library card at home after finding that book you reserved.
If those events never occured, this would be heralded as a great use of technology and we would be harking its merits rather than debating its flaws. If those events never occured, I could have seen us one day leave behind the wads of credit cards, keys, and cash we have to carry around with us. If those events never occured, there would be fewer posts here that fall in the paranoid camp.
Terrorism has changed us more than we care to admit.
I guess he is trying to protect his privacy by pulling the 'ole use a generic name trick. Seems to be quite a few Mark West's in the greater Chicago Area.
>>>There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers. If you cannot see that, then you are forcing yourself to be blind to it.
If all the library needed was a random sequence of numbers, why not just do this:
RANDOMIZE
a = RND
??
Oh, a uniquely identifying number that does not identify you yet let them know that you are you?
I call bullshit on something, I'm just not sure what that something is.
The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
The libraries I visited so far never asked for a library card to use the computers. Some will ask for up to a dollar an hour to use the computers, some won't charge anything.
The last library I went to had free unfiltered Internet access and would proudly write it on every terminal.
The only library card I ever got was with little private information (name and phone number).
I live in Canada though and never been to a library on the other side of the border.
Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
If someone goes to my library, they can just walk up to the computer and start using without ever telling anyone who they are. to me, using your fingerprint to prove you are who you say you are isn't so much of an issue as why in the world they care who you are in the first place. it doesn't matter what measures they go through to try and protect peoples fingerprints, the best way to insure security in privacy related matters is to not ever store data that you don't need.
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
I'm not affiliated with that site. Could contain spyware, viruses, who knows. It's owned by someone named John Hurliman.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Officials promise to protect the confidentiality of the fingerprint records.
Is that really best? Wouldn't an open access list be better than a list which only a few have access to? Restricted access to information is just misleading to people and would give certain people, librarians and some staff access to the names of people that access computers. I remember they used to have cards in sleaves in the books that showed you everyone that had it before you, isn't it better to know that your name will be knowable to all rather than not know who could know.
RTFA. It cannot be reversed. The fingerprint hash is NOT unique.
"As he states - it is a one-way algorithm."
I think that "one-way" part is a bit silly. Essentially it is a lossy compression algorithm. Which when run on the image of your fingerprint will give you the same code everytime. It is repeatable, otherwise it would serve no purpose for identification. So, you cannot reverse the algorithm to create a full finger print, but you could theoretically reverse it enough to create a partial print which is apparently good enough to identify a person for access control. So, would probably stand up in court.
"There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers. If you cannot see that, then you are forcing yourself to be blind to it."
If it was random it would be useless as a means of access control. Essentially, they are requiring partial finger prints to be on record. Which you most certainly could cross reference, with one extra step with any finger print database you choose. Don't sugar coat this with incorrect information.
Now I know, the ACLU is a bunch of commie liberals, but let us not forget the very public rebuke Ashcroft et al. received because not only were their search warrant requests being rubber stamped by the judicial panel, but they were also full of errors (one agent was even barred from appearing before the court because he regularly included errors): "In virtually every instance, the government's misstatements and omissions in FISA applications and violations of the Court's orders involved information sharing and unauthorized disseminations to criminal investigators and prosecutors."
Now for some corrections (from Section 215 text):
In other words, they don't need the director's approval, and an "Assistant Special Agent in Charge" is a run-of-the-mill agent assigned to a case. So basically, the cleaning contractors and secretaries cannot request the warrants, but most everyone else can. These warrant requests go to:
This very close congressional oversight you suggest is really a semi-annual report by the attorney general to those committees to tell them the requests that were made, the number requested, and the number accepted, modified, and denied (this from the new 'Sec. 502 Congressional Oversight').
So we've established that you are technically correct that not just anyone can make the requests (as I mentioned, the cleaning crews and secretaries are excluded), and there is oversight (that rubber-stamps the requests, no matter how factually in error they are).
The PATRIOT Act is interesting reading. I suggest you read the text some time instead of getting the boiled down versions off of Fox News.
It's GOT to be a trial balloon. IIRC, the patriot act has a number of points or provisions which are to expire soon unless congress (the opposite of PROGress) extends or rewrites them.
Maybe this is a trial, subterfuge vendetta against the librarians who stiffly resisted the initial patriot and other acts that were after library patron information. See, if Illinois approves of it, other states--particularly some of the bible-belt states-- might cause this to be mass-deployed around the US. I do realize that some foreign countries, maybe Taiwan and Singapore, have some rather (western-perspective) invasive mechanisms for tax collection (tho Taiwan just allowed Linux and Mac/Apple users to pay taxes via a recently-deployed piece of software access) and other lawful expeditions/law enforcement, but maybe now the US is seeking out ways of keeping abreast of individual behavior, movements, intents, and such...
"You are under arrest for crimes you WILL commit..." With that, who needs a temporal stability police agency?
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Then, they can surf for child porn on your account.
Not in my public library system. The spineless spinsters already started to filter content.
It looks like the book "Fooling Fingerprint Scanners for Dummies" is going to be checked out quite a bit more.
I doesn't matter where public libraries get their funding; public, private, bake sale, or porn taxes. Libraries are one of the four pillars of a democratic government. The precept that knowledge itself is democractic, free for all, privilege of none. The only restriction any librarian (a title I hold in great esteem) should enforce is protecting a citizens right to access public knowledge from those who would restrict it. And all this is, is an attempt at restriction of public access, no matter how you dress it up.
...is anything directly in conflict with the political agenda of the people in power. Courts may rule against such a broad definition, but they may not as things are...
I am from naperville.
YES our libraries are well-funded. we recieve a lot of awards for the quality of our libraries.
this does seem like a privacy issue, but a lot of people have pointed out why this makes sense, and isnt a breach of privacy. Naperville public libraries are very adamant about personal rights, and that guy fondling himself was a great example. they wouldnt release his information without a subpoena, and they still havent filtered internet access. (although parents can set the filter on their kids, which is good imho)
naperville is pretty conservative, but the democratic contingent of the population is growing.
and there are a lot of problems swept under the rug like dominion stated. i also know many heroin addicts who have been to rehab multiple times, and lots of people who have done their share of time at linden oaks. i remember in 6th grade there were kids who had mimi M&M plastic vail type things with crack in them at school, and they were never caught, and even if they were, the parents had lots of money for good lawyers and got them off scot free b/c all the parents think their kid is perfect and can do no wrong.
im moving out asap lol
or was it the Empire.
same diff.
If the "fingerprint bar code" is a one-way function like a hash, your lawyer could argue that, even if your fingerprint bar code matches that of a terrorist, there could be other people with the same fingerprint bar code.
cpeterso
It's a bit disingenious of them to try and calm people's fears with this sort of bullshit; the 'unique numeric sequence' they're storing is as good as storing the actual fingerprint.
Input error. Replace user and press any key to continue.
When signing up for access, why not just provide a fake fingerprint to the scanner in the first place? Then, the fake fingerprint just becomes your library card. It's not like the library has a back-end fingerprint database to "verify" the scan you gave them was correct in the first place.
Oh, and on another note - is it just me or is the invocation of Child Porn becoming a new Godwin's Law? Is there an epidemic of people stealing library cards to surf for child porn in public or something? ;)
I was about to suggest the same thing! As far as I'm concerned, if you bring up child porn in an attempt to justify some idiotic measure, the argument in its favor is automatically lost. The same thing goes for "will somebody think of the children!".
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
If you're using the public library as your source of Internet Access you've got bigger fish to fry then privacy. You need to get out from under that rock you've been hiding.
That being said, I will cut you.
If I check out books, you need to know who I am so you can reclaim the books. Why do you need to know who I am before you let me use the computer?
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
As he states - it is a one-way algorithm. If I have your barcode off your library card, I cannot reconstruct your name, SSN, birthdate, and all that without going into the library's database. With the number-sequence that this system creates, I cannot reconstruct your fingerprint at all. I cannot reconstruct any of the data previously mentioned without going into the database. So, instead of creating a random number with the unix timestamp as a seed, they are creating a random number with your fingerprint as a seed. What is so shocking about that?
Just because it's one-way and you can't reconstruct the fingerprint from the 15 points doesn't mean you can't do a cross reference. Just start with your library of fingerprints, calculate all the one-way transformations, and you're set.
It's still vulnerable to a standard dictionary attack.
I was the system admin of a library for three years, and I understand what they are doing. If I was pitching this idea to my director, I'd use the two reasons: 1. Library computers are the most abused on the planet. We had everything from middle school kids looking viewing pornography to script kiddies attempting to use the terminal as an anonymous machine to stage attacks. We can't censor the internet because we are a library but we need to make sure actual library patrons are using it. 2. Budgets. Libraries have almost no budget at all, and computers cost money. Let's make sure only the proper people are using them so we don't need to go out to purchase new computers to supply the demand of people who are not patrons. (Although, i'm sure these finger print scanners are not cheap but it looks like they are based in the same town. so they may be getting a deal as a demo site) Libraries are like a club with free membership, your fingerprint scan is just a unique identifier the same as a bar code but a lot harder to abuse, they aren't tracking what you are doing. If you want to use their computers you need to have a membership, it's as simple as that.
also known as nigg-nagg
On another civil liberties-related note, Naperville has a constitutionally controversial "presence restriction" law. Basically since there were a few cases where the police would bust a party and the few people who were drinking would put their drinks down, they got a law passed that allows them to ticket any minor present at an event where any other minors were drinking, regardless of whether they were in posession/consumption of alchohol; this has even included perfectly sober people picking up their impaired friends from the parties instead of letting them drive home. As far as I know, our law is the only one which allows non-drinkers to be charged - do any Slashdotters know of other towns with this kind of law?
--- You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad- Neal (not Cowboy) Boortz
Thanks for the clarification.
If you're worried about fingerprints, wear gloves all the time. Can't evil government agents always fingerprint the books that were returned?
as someone who grew up in naperville, this doesn't surprise me at all. naperville is easily one of the most republican cities in illinois. it's where GW called that nytimes writer an asshole. more to the point though, naperville *has* had a number of very bizarre cases of...perversion? some dude was recently busted for walking through the halls of napervilles largest high school without any clothes on. that, plus the hardcore conservatism plus the insanely hardcore police system there...none of this is surprising at all. lastly, someone here made a comment about trust, as in it's not the technology it's trusting those in charge to use it wisely and how we wouldn't know if it's being abused or not. i would buy that argument if we didn't have a free press. but we do. and our free press takes pleasure in finding abuses of power (a good thing). im not saying this still isnt shady business, but really, minding the paranoia is a better use of energy. it's like when people freak out about giving up the SSN. yeah, i would to if i didn't have the proteceted-by-law ability to say "none of your damn business." no one is being forced to give their fingerprints. if you (a general 'you') don't want to have the librarian log you on then you and your pride will just have to go somewhere else.
what expectation of privacy do you have when accessing public equipment that is the subject of a legal investigation?
You need a library card, and ID, to check out a book at a library. You need this because the library does not have unlimited resources so they need to get their books back. But you've never needed to show an ID simply to read at the library. Ever. Until now.
Ya see, they got these things called logs. They track wherever you go on the web (really. I swear.). Since they have your exact ID time coded with the logs they can tell everyplace you've visited and thus every place you've read and thus eveything you've shown interest in.
Surfed for info on: Gay marriage? It's in there. Communist ideology? It's in there. Republican blogging? It's in there. Anti-semitism? It's in there. Yes, every web site you show interest in is now linked with your name, regardless of the legal status of that page.
They get this data, and retain it, regardless of whether or not a criminal investigation is in the works. They get to keep this data regardless of whether anyone ever commits a crime again... ever.
Sure, the cops can get a warrant to listen in on private converstations if there's probable cause (check out the fourth ammendment) but here the library is tracking your interests without a warrant.
Why exactly should law enforcement "rightly" have access to this info?
What would happen if activists that wanted to counter this new scheme laid off the protesting and learned to fake fingerprints by the above method? If they:
Basically maybe this kind of system might be defeated by taking a collective leak into the data pool, not by beating the core security system. There has to be a better, more mature way of handling it, but I've got nothing.
How do you know /. isn't sending the IP of every AC post to the FBI?
Except we pay taxes to have these libraries -- I don't see an option to 'opt-out' on that.
We all hate them sex offenders, so anything we do to track them is OK. So what if a few innocent people are inconvenienced. What are you, a child molester? Or worse, a liberal?
So I don't get why they need to identify who uses the computers in the first place! It's like going into the library and having to let them know which books you're browsing through.
I understand checking out books - you need to hold people liable so they don't steal the books. But when you're using the computer, you don't have to "return" the knowledge. Why is a public system -- designed to serve the public (everyone) needing this?
Moderation -1: recycling worn out jokes.
You're new to Slashdot aren't you.
1a) Apply Scotch tape to top of mouse button or a similar place.
or
1b) or pick some one you hate (like your openent running for dog catcher)
2) remove tape and take home
3) use finger print to build resulting fake finger
4) use fake finger to login and commit major crime
5) stand back and laugh
Despite TV shows, when police find someone they "like" for the crime they are much more likely to "find" other evidence. They also generally stop looking for anyone else.
Why do they NEED to know who used the computer? Real criminals would just use an open wireless in the library parking lot anyway.
I guess they forgot about the Patriot Act.
So does it have to be your own finger?
In our library we use the Netloan Booking system.
We can then find out who was using what pc at what time as you have to book on with card/pin. The acceptable use policy says you are responsible for what happens on the pc in your time. Don't think we really need any more than that...
Acid House saves Souls
Excuse me, but I didn't take any of these books, or visit any of these websites. I believe someone has stolen my fingerprint. Could you please issue me another one?
Oh, you say you can't? Damn, I guess I'm really fucked now.
What a great idea this is! Think I'll score some politicians fingerprints and go flirt online with some federal agents pretending to be 14 year old girls.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Officials promise to protect the confidentiality of the fingerprint records.
Ok, well as long as they promise.
I'm not quite sure what the big deal is? If I wanted your fingerprint I could simply follow you around and wait for you to put something down (say a glass at a restaurant) and it would be a LOT easier to get than to hack into or convince a judge to pull your Fingerprint out of the database??
Their job is to disemminate information. I am ok with reasonalbe precautions when i am removing information from library, like having a library card withe a verrified address.
If i ever encountered this in a library, i would do my best to destroy the reader, and reneder whatever software blocks are on it unuseable.
I am sick of this shit.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
...if it captures 15 points or 1000 or whatever? You would not. Maybe it captures 15 in the begining, then later is altered. How would you know? You would not. Are people naive enough to trust those "authority figures" who put this kind of crap into operation? Never mind...
I guess that I could just make a negative of my fingerprint using latex, rub my excreted body oils on it, place it on my finger, and they'd have a fingerprint that would not even match mine *unless anyone had HALF a brain) and just put that into the system, than hack the holy hell out of the FBI/CIA servers, and when they fingerprint the computer used, all they'll find is a negative of my fingerprint (which for the technically unsavvy, means that instead of the actual raised ridges/whorls/arches, etc. being used, the depressions instead are used.) and they could never find out who did what, unless they knew what to look for (HIGHLY doubtful, given the nature/intelligence of our government.)
REALLY SMART WASTE OF MONEY, IMHO.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
It's a known fact that there are high persentages of Gays (you know, queers, fags, homos) in both the library systems and Educational systems, at least here in the usa.
They are attempting to get this technology in place, so they can bring the same kind of 'justice' that 'straight' people did to them through-out the ages (ie jail, killings, mockings, etc).
While the political climate for them is the best that it has been in maybe 1000's of years, they know they must strike-while-the-iron-is-hot, before the straight people 'snap'-- and make them wish they were hiding back in their closets.
All this talk about fingerprint, coronary (eye prints) and especially DNA as a 'good' or nearly perfect way of identifying people, it is nothing but another ploy by the 'Beast' (machine, one government of the world, etc) to have a way of persecuting and prosecuting innocent people.
After all, as DNA becomes more intrenched as a 'perfect' way of 'proving' crimes, it will be used more and more to 'SET-UP' people by simply 'placing' some small amount of DNA of someone at a sceen of a crime. Collecing DNA is also one of the (if not 'thee') EASIEST ways to collect. All you need is something the person drank, ate, or was a part of the person, like hair, snot, or spit. So instead of 'perfect' way to solve crimes, this will be a perfect way for the pigs (cops, feds, armies) to 'commit crimes'.
As far as librarians 'needing' this type of technology to 'make sure' the right patron is checking out books, it is about the most lame excuse they could have come with. Just the opposite is what they (the dykes) should be promoting, being in the extremely important job of running 'OUR' libraries. The should be 'glad' people (homeless, theives, etc) are stealing the books (for whatever reason) because even if a 'little' benefit comes from this, it will make the world better.
I have personal knowlegde of these homosexuals, violating the rights of straight people by 'banning' them from libraries over something the straight person 'said', or when a straight male 'looked' at a potentional other 'dyke' and the librarian went into a (passive agressive) rage by calling the pigs(cops).
-- Dont' hate me cause I'm ugly.
I will gladly loose all of life's battles.. in order to win the war..
from the parent's post re: FBI backing down after issuin a warrant to a library - the libraries' position:
Our trustees faced a difficult decision. It is our job to protect the right of people to obtain the books and other materials they need to form and express ideas.
Uhhh, no, your job ends at supplying the materials, having a mandate that you do so in order to enable people to "express ideas" (like flying a plane into a building, eh?) sounds like peecee nutjob crap.
Interesting reading.
Indeed.
And the answer is: This organization is defined by its unique ability to initiate force as a means to an end, while anybody else who does so is a criminal.
(In other words, the government and the people are not, have never been, and could never possibly be one and the same.)
You took his stuff. You pound him.
No way should I need to give my fingerprint (used for many years to find and identify criminals) to check out a book or use a "public" computer, at a place where you the citizen pays to have the computer there in the first place!
Absolutely no way! Where do we draw the line? I don't care that it is a numerical representation of my finger, it's my finger. While they are at it maybe they should require my ssn, signature, telephone number, address, middle initial, and maiden name? Wait they already do... I have done work on a libraries computer system, how many librarians does it take to secure a computer network attached to the internet? Give up? THEY CAN'T!!! So why would you trust your information there?
Dude, not only have you misinterpreted the PATRIOT ACT, but you've also missed the newsreports from FISA that stated that they have had federal investigators use the newly created loophole so that FISA enquiries have gone up a whopping 118%...and due to the loophole the FISA can't say 'no' anymore.
And as for the time limit? Doesn't exist anymore. I really recommend that you re-read the PATRIOT ACT.
Shit, the PATRIOT ACT makes me a terrorist if I start a business anywhere outside of the US and outperform a US business: go search the PATIOT ACT for terms like 'economic detriment' and 'foreign entity'. Does it sound ridiculous? Yes...but that's what the PATRIOT ACT states, so even if it was only meant for terrorists, a lawyer can (and thus will) read it like that, given the propper circumstances.
So re-read your PATRIOT ACT, keeping lawyers, loopholes and different interpretations in mind. Read it like it was meant to be evil, and you'll shudder...and the really bad thing is? That the 'evil reading' is correct, because that's what the fucking ACT says, even if you wanted it to mean/do something else.
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
" the patriot act has a number of points or provisions which are to expire soon "
Yup...but the scary part is how many clauses don't have sunset clauses. Read the PATRIOT ACT and see how many you can discover!(!!)
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
Right down the road... Bolingbrook high school.
- hs.pdf
Cost per Student: $25,615
Square Foot Cost: $152
Cost of Construction (Building)
$84.0 million
Total Project Cost
$99.6 million
http://www.asbj.com/lbd/2005/projects/bolingbrook
But it's still shockingly cavalier to describe the technology as "just a bar code".
As he states - it is a one-way algorithm. If I have your barcode off your library card, I cannot reconstruct your name, SSN, birthdate, and all that without going into the library's database.
But if you have a digital hash of my fingerprint, and access to, say, the DMV database (my state collects fingerprints in digital form for driver's licenses), you can trivially mount a dictionary attack.
Run all the fingerprints in the driver's license database through the same hashing-and-matching algorithm as the scanner uses. If the print is in the database you get a hit. Then you have the DMV record - with the name, address, SS #, driver's license number, and digitized picture suitable for wanted posters.
Similarly for the FBI / NCIC fingerprint databases (FBI has mine from the old security clearance unless they lost it). Similarly for the one from the department of state for passport and visa holders (where you get both citizens and foreigners). Similarly Interpol. Also several other databases - some of them commercial.
Even law-abiding citizens' fingerprints end up in lots of places, of in machine-usable form.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Hello,
I have been envisioning a scenario very similar to Big Brother. In the future anyone who wants to operate a computer will require a computer operators license. The license will contain an RFID chip containing encrypted authorization tokens and security level information. You will obtain your license through the Ministry of Information after submitting all required information. This will include DNA samples, family history, medical and psychological profiles, etc. Only those who are allowed by the government to operate computers will be allowed to. Anyone found to be using Computers or related devices will be arrested and confined at a detention and mind-altering facility {i.e. Room 101}. The reason this will be forced on us it due to terrorism.
It is a sad future I forsee, but I have been right about other technology issues. Unfortunately I forsee a joint venture between the US government and Microsoft in the next 10 years. This will be the 1st step toward the Computer Operators license.
Oh joy...
Michael A. Uman
Sr Software Engineer
softwaremagic.net
If anyone has the time or interest to write up / summarize any of the points made here and generally, the issues involved, I would be interested in writing to Deputy Director West. I am a Naperville Resident and I am pretty appalled by this. No doubt I plan to take some action.
I have a friend who burns his fingerprints off with acid, and keeps them blank. He is starting to look less paranoid and more intelligent.
This is quite scary.
Not a sentence!
No, my scenario is that you are an FBI agent or government official with access to the FBI fingerprint database. You also have the power under current US law to compel the library to provide you with its hashed fingerprint database and keep the fact that it has done so secret. You can probably easily obtain the hashing algorithm used by the library's fingerprint authentication system. You run that algorithm on your fingerprint database, and you now have the ability to cross-reference the Library's database with your records. This is contrary to the library Assistant Director Mark West's claim (in TFA) that the database cannot be "cross-referenced with other fingerprint databases such as those kept by the FBI or the Illinois State Police."
Personally, I am not so concerned about this. I generally have some faith in our law enforcement officials to do the right thing. I objected, though, to your naive assertion that the fingerprint is just being used "to create a random sequence of numbers." A hash really does encode information, and that information can be extracted and used via the correct techniques. If it didn't there would be no point in doing this.
As for concerns about 'hash security', isn't that what john-the-ripper is used for? Just because you can brute-force a password algorithm doesn't make it insecure.
Yes, but you still have to keep the hashed password file secure to have a robust login security system. In the old days, on unix systems, this file could be easily accessed, because people thought like you do that it was just a bunch of random numbers that couldn't be converted back into passwords. This is not sufficiently true to maintain good security, so it became common to make that file inaccessible.
Then, even if they do figure out that a certain sequence of fingerprint identities matches up a specific hash - what? They somehow clone a finger and alter the dna to create your fingerprint so they can use the computer at the library?
It's not that hard to make an artificial finger that will fool a cheap fingerprint scanner. There was a post on /. some time ago about a guy who developed a technique to do this in under half an hour using commonly-available and cheap materials. It would be more difficult to write a computer program to generate a fake fingerprint that produces the correct hash result. I'm not really too worried about this possibility.
This is a case of the library using fingerprints for a second or so to create a unique ID that cannot be converted back into a fingerprint.
The trouble is that the unique ID is not a random number. It encodes some information from your fingerprint. The ramifications of this are not that different from the ramifications of having an actual fingerprint database, especially if other companies and organizations start using the same fingerprint scanners as the library. In this case, the system forces you to have a unique ID which is both universal and unchangeable so that if it is compromised somehow you can never replace it.
Why bother when they can call their buddies at the NSA for the Echelon logs?
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
"You are under arrest for crimes you WILL commit..." With that, who needs a temporal stability police agency?
John Anderton, you look like you could use a Guinness!
Do a search on LexisNexis on NSLs. The FBI has never actually had to use USAPA provisions to obtain information from a library. NSLs have been used for years successfully for this purpose, including the more recent anti-terrorism investigations following 9/11 and the inception of the USAPA.
-- No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
Have you honestly read the entire USAPA? If so I'd like to know your name. You are probably only the second person on earth to do so. :p
If not it might be more useful to cite for us which subsections you derive your conclusions from. I promise the ensuing discussion would be much more interesting.
-- No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
-flame from a naperville citizen-
/. already. you're almost always using words you don't understand and you're talking about a city you don't even know. go vent about your pathetic high school life elsewhere. you're just one big bitchfest.
you're still infantile in your maturity and understanding of a community you make claims about. what you described as your high school experience happens in nearly every high school, just in different moderations. You obviously led the life of someone that would be involved in such activities, given that you have so much to say about them.
just stop posting to
http://www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_SM/0061-050 3-2012-4050_SM.jpg
My (Patent Pending) artificial prosthetic for complete anonymity in an ever evolving world. I call it the WhoGyver(tm). Simply wear any trench coat or sufficiently swarthy attire and attach this prosthetic to your wrist. You can view illegal porn on any computer you want, AS anyone you want!
(Identity strips sold seperatly.)
Another great thing about my product is that even if they do away with the thumb print scanners, this realistic prosthesis could be resold to someone such as Chubbs Peterson.
What a deal!
using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of number
The only thing random about the sequence of numbers thus generated is your tenuous grasp of the concept of unpredictability and security.
With the number-sequence that this system creates, I cannot reconstruct your fingerprint at all.
But I can construct a fingerprint that will generate the same barcode that is on your library card because it's not a secure hash. Then I can go surf for child porn on your account. When the state police come knocking on your door, you can explain to them that you are happy that the library went to every measure to ensure that patrons are who they say they are.
What this system does, like the vast majority of "security" systems being implemented around the world in these "post 9/11 times" is damage your privacy rights without providing only the illusion of security. Once your privacy rights are gone, you will no protection left at all.
Americans must be blind or stupid. Nobody seems to realize the extent to which they are being cataloged and recorded.
:)
RFID tags in passports, national ID card, DNA records, retina and iris scans, fingerprinting -- your complete and total identity being reduced to convenient unique keys for a multitude of government databases. (And don't forget credit cards with all their new innovations for "your convenience and protection")
How many 'privacy-related' stories have you seen in the past few months? Is nobody starting to get a hint at just how far 'homeland security' is going to go?
It is claimed by your friends and protectors in Washington that 9/11 was the result of government agencies not having enough information available to each other -- so they couldn't connect the dots. Well, the dots are being collected and connected very well now!
Ask anyone entering the USA from abroad how they enjoyed being fingerprinted and retina scanned on the way into the 'land of the free'. Don't want to subject yourself to it? No problem -- the return flight is waiting for you!
As a Canadian living in Russia, even the KGB (now FSB) could only DREAM of having the kind of records, tools, technologies that the US government has at their disposal. Soviet Russia never had anything like what the US government has today.
The problem is that crime and freedom are absolute opposites. When you have no freedom, you have no crime. When you DO have freedom, then there WILL be people who abuse it.
SO America, how much freedom are you willing to give up? How far are you willing to trust the government once they have you cataloged so well, they can identify not just YOU, but EVERYTHING you've done, and everywhere you've been for your entire life?
Unfortunately, this is the PRICE of a 'crime-free' society. For me, I'll continue to live in Russia where I carry only a photocopy of my passport and registration card, and 100 rubles (about 3 bucks) for the occasional police stop when I'm driving.
But of course, what do I know -- "big brother" knows what's best for their citizens -- and remember -- homeland security and all the wonderful things your government will know about you is for YOUR CONVENIENCE and PROTECTION -- right?!
Israeli Solution.
Become a personal 'carer' and escort a disabled person in to surf the web. Somebody elses fingerprints. Dont stop there, apply for passport and loans after a deed poll name change - worked in New Zealand.
i don't think he ever said he read the entire Act, so what is your point except to try and attack his position ad hominem? The Act says what it says, not what people want to pretend it says. That is an important point.
Also his points are not worthless or uninteresting just because he didn't do your work for you. You don't believe him...then do the searches of the Act he suggests and THEN reply that he is wrong.
It should be clear to anyone that the anti-terrorism laws are out of control and expand police power too far. Did you know that having a sawed-off shotgun, previously just possession of an illegal weapon, now officially makes you a terrorist in possession of a WMD? Thank you USAPA.
Don't hassle the staff. They probably hate it as much as you do and don't get paid enough to take the kind of abuse they already get daily from people arguing over 20c overdue fines. Speak to the Director and the Library Board. They're the ones responsible for this.
Oh, f*ck. I was hoping it wouldn't come to this :) See, I have read the entire PATRIOT ACT...in 2001, when it got passed into law. I wanted to know what the stink was about.
:(
So now, just to prove my point, I have to re-read the thing again....
Check section 814(e). '[...]economic damages[...]'.
This seemingly simple statement included in (of all things) the cyberterrorism section basically means that civil action can be taken against me, marking me as a terrorist, if my non-US company has such a good product that I force the US company to go out of business or to not make as much money as they would if my product didn't exist; they can make the case that I am doing them economic damage.
Oh, man, I hate you for making me go over that POS document with a hangover...now my head really hurts
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
Nothing gets a napervillian riled up more than the idea that maybe their pleastantville suburb isn't as perfect as they would like to think.
You should reread my post a couple times, and then you might figure out I was asking him to cite which part of the USAPA he got that from (pay close attention to the ":p", as you will note from his reply, the parent actually understood what I was saying where as you didn't.
Title 8 of the USAPA contains numerous legal definitions, but some of the sections which modify multiple parts of the USC contain seperate definitions only applicable to that specific part of the code. Clarity my friend is paramount in any discusson of law.
-- No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
The definitions in USAPA 814 apply to USC 1030, which is the principle anti-hacker statute for federal law enforcement.
The definition you cite 1030(d)(11) which was changed by 814(d)(5) is where your "economic loss" reference actually comes from.
It has nothing to do with certifying companies as terrorist simply because they cause economic damage. Specifically because this definition is ONLY used if you have committed one of the offenses listed under 1030(a-b), which again only include cybercrime and are to some degree pretty limited in scope.
Economic loss was a big change to this section (previously economic loss could not be calculated into damages used to determine the level of the felony or the damages awarded in a civil suit), but the reality is that Congress only included in a form statute what the courts had already determined in Middleton v. US. So this really didn't change anything. It only codified that congress agreed with the 10th circuit court of appeals (ignore for the moment that hackers typically don't have deep pockets).
I don't how you came to the conclusion that a definition of economic loss can be extrapalated into defining you as a terrorist simply because your company succeeds in competing against a US company. You couldn't have gotten it from reading 814 and USC 1030 which it modifies because it simply isn't there.
-- No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
You should reread my post a couple times, and then you might figure out I was asking...as you will note from his reply, the parent actually understood what I was saying where as you didn't.
Hmmm. I detect a pattern here. If someone says something you don't agree with you call them liars or dumb and their ideas uninteresting. Do you even realize that your reply to the original poster had absolutely no information or thoughts about the topic under discussion - it was simply a smarmy insult to the writer. You stated that that his ideas were uninteresting because he did not cite the USAPA, while I found them quite interesting without citations. You used sarcasm to imply his ideas were worthless or he was a liar because he had not read the entire USAPA [which he had never claimed to have done]. Now you imply I am too dumb to understand your post without reading it several times, and don't grasp the importance of clarity. Ironic, isn't it?.
Apparently you did not get it that I was calling you on your sarcastic ad hominem style of attacking the person and not his ideas. I said that if you didn't agree with his ideas YOU should do the citation search to prove him wrong, not put the work back on the person you just insulted.
You got called on your own ad hominem sarcastic bullshit, buddy. No amount of name-calling, no matter how sarcastically done, is going to change that.
I'm sure you think you are making some kind of point here, but you are missing the contents of this entire thread.
You are correct in one regard, I did believe his assessment of a legal matter to be worthless without citation. His reply to me included a citation, and if you read that and my reply you will see why I believe his opinion to be uneducated (not in the general sense of his personal education but in that he hasn't actually studied the specific matter like he claims). Further, he actually is claiming to have read the entire USAPA, which you will find if you bother to read his futher comments.
Having studied the USAPA for a solid 4 months as part of a research project, including the specific section he cites in his later comments, I believe that he is totally off base. His conclusion as cited is not supportable.
If someone says something you don't agree with you call them liars or dumb and their ideas uninteresting.
Please cite where I called him or anyone else a "liar" or "dumb". The only person engaging in name calling is you, and while I find it amusing that you attribute my "request" to the parent for citation as an ad hominem laden argument it serves no purpose whatsoever to informing this debate.
Apparently you did not get it that I was calling you on your sarcastic ad hominem style of attacking the person and not his ideas. I said that if you didn't agree with his ideas YOU should do the citation search to prove him wrong, not put the work back on the person you just insulted.
I have indeed cited specific sections of the act and the code that that act modified in discenting from his opinion. Which you would know if you had bothered to read them. Unfortunately you seem bent on name calling instead. If you really want to contribute read our replies to eachother and join a useful conversation. I'd be glad to hear your opinions on a useful matter.
-- No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
I don't want to get into an ideological argument, but I'm honestly curious, so I have to ask. What is the right amount of money for a government to have -- theoretically, in a modern nation, the only reason money has value at all is because it is agreed that the government can inbue worthless materials with a agreed upon value. If it were possible (not that is most likely is), for you to have the same or better quality of life with a much higher tax burden, would it matter what taxes were? I'm seriously wondering. I know, in my case, that I'd much rather have higher taxes than to owe over $100,000 dollars (between the wife and me) for our higher education (B.A.'s and Masters)... Isn't it really a question of where the trade offs are made?
Or is it simply, as I've come to find in many cases, a question of ideology? Is it simply "wrong" to tax? If so, then what taxes, and indeed, why? No flame here, I'm simply wondering
thanks,
------- Oh damn.... the Sigfile escaped... -Great OM
I bet they're behind the corporate firewall too. And that users leave their entire surfing history right on the machine. Fuck, I bet they leave themselves logged into MSN. Sounds to me like the librarians don't know what the fuck they're doing leaving terminals with a 100% open connection. And I call bullshit that they don't want your address. You must live in a town with a population under 1000 where everyone knows everyone. I live in Canada too and guess what? It's a big fucking country.
Hash collision. Hash collision? Not really, but by analogy. Read this:
"Naperville library officials said the technology cannot be used to reconstruct a person's actual fingerprint. The scanners, made by Naperville-based U.S. Biometrics Corp., use an algorithm to convert 15 or more specific points into a unique numeric sequence."
So, basically, this is a geometric 15-point "fingerprint hash" calculated from the actual biometric measurements. Sounds more benign than than recording the actual fingerprint, doesn't it? Except, of course, if your 15-point "hash" happens to coincide (within tolerance) of someone else's who happens to be a criminal of some kind. Then, when the collects a bunch of fingerprints from a crime scene, they might run them through the same 15-point "hash" calculation, screen them against all the other such sequences they might obtain from the local library database under a secret court order. *Poof* Congratulations, you are a "person of interest", based on even *less* precise information than if they did have your real fingerprint.
Of course, you will be politely asked to voluntarily turn over your full fingerprint to verify that it does not match the one collected. And only people with nothing to hide would have a problem with this, right? It is not as if mistakes ever happen with fingerprints.
My attitude is: if the police state does not have my fingerprint, then it can't turn up in erroneous searches, and I and my family won't have the joy of experiencing the repercussions of a false positive. The police state can fingerprint all the criminals and others where fingerprint identification is necessary for the job (e.g., in the military, it is recorded for identification purposes), but when they start advocating fingerprinting of the general populace, I think there is something seriously wrong.
Fingerprinting is good, but it is not 100% reliable, and you can ruin people's lives if a mistake is made. Why should any more trust be placed in this 15-point measurements? What is wrong with plain, old, address and name for the sake of a library card?
As soon as the US starts fingerprinting visitors, their governments will start fingerprinting Americans when they visit. Database people, big hardware makers, & governments will be overjoyed.
"Terrorists" & criminals will continue with their business as usual.
Why the heck do they need to uniquely identify my library computer use in the first place? If it is discovered that illegal actions have happened from a library computer, then use good old fashioned police work to track it down.
The reason people want to identify one person easily and specifically is because it makes it easier to comply with general fishing searches should the library be slapped with them. These searches come in the form of "Tell us everyone who has used this computer on this day" in one of its most general forms to "Tell us everyone who visited this site and from which computers" in a more specific version.
That's an awfully wide net to cast. How about they set up surveillance, after receiving court approval, and make sure that they aren't violating anyone's Fourth Amendment rights.
Hmmm... I guess someone needs to go to your library, tell them that they are you - they can even print a fake barcode on any old library card since barcode techology is open and freely available to anyone and everyone. Then, they can surf for child porn on your account. When the feds come to your door, you can explain to them that it is a terrible idea for the library to go to every measure to ensure that patrons are who they say they are.
Or how about not keeping any records of who uses what computer at all? Put the computers in open spaces and staff them with helpful staff people who are always willing to look over ones should and lend a hand with any problems that may arise. This way you are less likely to get a visit for visiting sites that are perfectly legal, but "suspicious" such as anti-war sites, or independent media sites, or foreign news sites, or a host of other topics that might be frowned upon by any government that is made uncomfortable by dissent and/or an educated populace. A similar case can be made for people seeking out medical information. Their searches for more information should have some expectation of privacy.
Computer use tracking happens in places like China where people are put in prison for nothing more than seeking out unfiltered information (among other things). Are you saying you want the US to be more like China in this respect?
There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers. If you cannot see that, then you are forcing yourself to be blind to it.
The difference pales when they both can be used to uniquely identify a single person and then be used to tie that person to activities that can rightfully argued are within their rights and should have an expectation of remaining private.
We don't require that everyone who uses a telephone must be uniquely identifiable before using a public phone. There is an expectation of privacy. Phones can similarly be used to gather information and carry on conversations that may contain a further protected nature such as discussions with a lawyer or doctor. At the same time, public telephones can be used for crimes as well, however such is the dual nature of almost any technology. At some point, good old fashioned policing has to be put into effect instead of requiring that all of the rights be stripped away of the overwhelmingly large majority of the decent law abiding people that make up this counry in order to make the job of catching the small minority of criminals easier.