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.'"
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
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.
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.
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
- 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
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
Freedom to read what you want without scrutiny seems like something Americans should hold dear. Using the public computers there seems like a natural extension.
I would love to dismiss this story as alarmist, but I fear the threat is real. These liberties we keep surrendering are starting to stack up. It's time to start using your votes on these issues while we still can.
SEO Firefox Extension
"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?
What does that mean exactly? Doesn't the "Patriot" Act allow for law enforcement officials to easily obtain library records during investigations?
From the article:
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, basically, everything's the same as before, except where you had a card with a barcode number before, now they generate the number from your finger.
In addition to increasing convenience, this actually increases privacy and security since now it's a lot harder to "become" somebody by stealing their card. Where before, in order to have the library think you're "you" all you needed was a card (which can be faked, stolen, etc), now you need the same fingerprint - much harder to do.
NOTHING IS CHANGING except not having to carry a card! There is no reason to freak out about this! Just because they're using your finger instead of a card now doesn't mean that it's suddenly a huge invasion of privacy.
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.
So patrons used to scan their library card and they could use the computer? There is no difference now
I disagree ... if they *used* to scan a library card, the card could be stolen, loaned to someone else, etc. That's a little tougher to do with a fingerprint, don'tcha think?
Of course, the 'BugMeNot' crew could just start mass-producing latex finger covers with some random finger print ;o)
my geeklog
... 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 don't think it's ironic considering that most people I hear using the "red state/blue state" crap are people of the blue variety.
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.
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.
It's Illinois, the right votes Democrat just as often as they vote Republican. I mean, you have heard of conservative Democrats, right? Hell, the strongman of Chicago, Daley, is not exactly what I would call a 'liberal.'
Alan Keyes got whalloped everywhere because he's not from Illinois, and Obama is a better politician. But voting records aren't the final authority on the culture of a community.
And yes, I did leave ten years ago to a nearby city. If you want to call me a liar for pointing out what I went through as a kid in "the best city in America to raise children", then whatever. Suffice to say, way too many people are familiar with Linden Oaks than should be.
Naperville has problems on a scale that no other community I've lived in has had. For instance, heroin use has gone through the roof in the past few years. Already two people I've known have died from overdoses, three have been through rehab, and one was clinically dead. None of them are what you would call stereotypical drug users. Domestic violence was a huge problem, until all of a sudden you just stopped hearing about it. Nothing changed, just nobody reported it anymore.
Naperville has the money and the blinders to pretend that they don't exist, but you know as well as I do, that the place has some fucked up shit going on underneath the surface.
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"