Advertisement

Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of Biometric Technologies

  • Sudeep Tanwar
  • Sudhanshu Tyagi
  • Neeraj Kumar
  • Mohammad S. ObaidatEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter covers the ethical, legal, and social implications of biometric technologies, which include fingerprint scanning, facial geometry, footprint scanning, retina and iris patterns, DNA, and heart beat scanning, among others. The introduction part of the chapter will address the process of how to do the enrollment in biometric technology as well as the matching process. At the end of introduction, different biometric techniques and stacks have been given. The next section describes the legal implications of biometric technology to the society. Social issues and uses of biometric technology in government agencies are included in two distinct sections. Different standards formed by the European government were also summarized. The general perception about the biometric technology has been covered in this chapter. Lastly business ethics, biometric security, and a couple of case studies like megaproject UIDAI of India and the utilization of biometric-based security system for banking systems have been covered. By the end of this chapter, readers will get the information about ethical, legal, and social implications on the biometric technologies along with the detailed knowledge of megaproject UIDAI of India and the utilization of biometric-based security system for banking systems.

Keywords

Ethical, legal, and social implications of biometrics Biometric technology Cryptosystem Fusion Multimodal biometrics 

References

  1. 1.
    D. Wright et al., Ethical dilemma scenarios and emerging technologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 87, 325–336 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Maria, M. Gameiro, Security, privacy and freedom and the EU legal and policy framework for biometrics. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 28, 320–327 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    V. Diaz, Legal challenges of biometric immigration control systems. Mexican Law Rev. 7(1), 1–28 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Catherine, Biometric standards–an overview. Inf. Secur. Tech. Rep. 7(4), 36–48 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Baca, J. Cosic, Z. Cosic, Forensic analysis of social networks (Case Study), Proc. of the ITI 2013 35th Int. Conf. on Information Technology Interfaces, 219–224 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. A. Kowtko, "Biometric authentication for older adults," IEEE Long Island Systems, Applications and Technology (LISAT) Conference 2014, Farmingdale, NY, 2014, pp. 1-6.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    G. Paul, J. Irvine, IEDs on the road to fingerprint authentication. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 5, 79–86 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Krlic, "Social costs of surveillance and the case of biometrics," 2014 37th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), Opatija, 2014, pp. 1278-1282.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Thavalengal, P. Corcoran, Iris recognition on consumer devices-challenges and progress. IEEE Int. Symp. on Technology in Society (ISTAS) Proc., 1–4 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Michael, The legal, social and ethical controversy of the collection and storage of fingerprint profiles and DNA samples in forensic science. IEEE Int. Symp. on Technology and Society, 48–60 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Krupp, C. Rathgeb and C. Busch, "Social acceptance of biometric technologies in Germany: A survey," 2013 International Conference of the BIOSIG Special Interest Group (BIOSIG), Darmstadt, 2013, pp. 1-5.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. Hornung, M. Desoi, M. Pocs, Biometric systems in future preventive scenarios – legal issues and challenges, 83–94 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Sullivan, Digital citizenship and the right to digital identity under Int. law. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 32, 474–481 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Clarke, Privacy impact assessments as a control mechanism for Australian counter-terrorism initiatives. Comput. Law Secur. Rev., Volume 32, Issue 3, 1–16 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    K. Stoychev, T. Georgiev, An alternative approach and attempt to come up with a standard for biometric user authentication in a network based environment. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 47, 74–78 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Li et al., An effective biometric cryptosystem combining fingerprints with error correction codes. Expert Syst. Appl. 39, 6562–6574 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Tal, M.H. Shiang, An efficient biometrics-based remote user authentication scheme using smart cards. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 33, 1–5 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Caldwell, Web service-based standards for biometrics interoperability. Biom. Technol. Today 2013, 9–11 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    T. Caldwell, Market report: border biometrics. Biom. Technol. Today 2015, 5–11 (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    K.L. Fors, Monitoring migrants or making migrants ‘misfit’? Data protection and human rights perspectives on Dutch identity management practices regarding migrants. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 32, 443–449, 2016Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Y. Liu, Scenario study of biometric systems at borders. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 27, 36–44 (2011). 2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    S.M. Matyas, J. Stapleton, A biometric standard for information management and security. Comput. Secur. 19, 428–441 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. Roberts, Biometric attack vectors and defenses. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 26, 14–25 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    V. Smejkal, J. Kodl and J. Kodl, "Implementing trustworthy dynamic biometric signature according to the electronic signature regulations," 2013 47th International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST), Medellin, 2013, pp. 1-6.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Y. Sun, M. Zhang, Z. Sun, T. Tan, Demographic analysis from biometric data: achievements, challenges, and New Frontiers. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 1–20 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2017.2669035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. S. Munalih, L. Mat Nen, A. Goh, L. K. Win, K. S. Ng and L. Ching Ow Tiong, "Challenge response interaction for biometric liveness establishment and template protection," 2016 14th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST), Auckland, 2016, pp. 698-701.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Cehic, M Quigley, Ethical issues associated with biometric technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 Information e-sources Management Association Int. Conf., 1–5 (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    J.D. Woodward et al., Army Biometric Applications: Identifying and Addressing Socio Cultural Concerns (RAND, Santa Monica, 2003). [Online]. Available: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1237Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    BIOVISION, Roadmap for biometrics in Europe to 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.eubiometricsforum.com/dmdocuments/BIOVISION_Roadmap.pdf
  30. 30.
    Data Protection Working Party of the European commission, Biometrics (EC, Brussels, 2003). [Online]. Available: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2003/wp80_en.pdf; Last visited 27 Mar 2007Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Committee for Information, Computer and communication Policy – Working Party on Information Security and Privacy, Biometric-based technologies, OECD (2004). [Online]. Available: http://www.oecd.org/sti/security-privacy
  32. 32.
    European Commission Joint Research Center, Biometrics at the Frontiers: Assessing the Impact on Society (2005). [Online]. Available: http://www.jrc.cec.eu
  33. 33.
    National Science and Technology Council, The National Biometrics Challenge. [Online]. Available: http://www.biometrics.gov/NSTC/pubs/biochallengedoc.pdf
  34. 34.
    K. Yang, E.D. Yingzi, Z. Zhou, Consent biometrics. Neurocomputing 100, 153–162 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    F.Zelazny, The evolution of India’s UID program, Center for Global Development, 1–44 (2012)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Unique Identification Authority of India, Ensuring Uniqueness: Collecting Iris Biometrics for the Unique ID Mission (2006). [Online]. Available: http://uidai.gov.in/UID_PDF/Working_Papers/UID_and_iris_paper_final.pdf
  37. 37.
    Unique Identification Authority of India, Envisioning a Role for Aadhaar in the Public Distribution System (2006). [Online]. Available: http://uidai.gov.in/UID_PDF/Working_Papers/Circulated_Aadhaar_PDS_Note.pdf
  38. 38.
    T.S. Siang et al., Ethical implications of digested medical and biometric data. IIMC Int. Conf. Mgt. Corp., 1–9 (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    S. Venkatraman, I. Delpachitra, Biometrics in banking security: A case study. Inf. Manag. Comput. Secur. 16(4), 415–430 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Int. Telecommunication Union, ICT Facts and Figures (2011). [Online]. Available: http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/facts/2011/material/ICTFactsFigures2011.pdf
  41. 41.
    A. Rebera, B. Guihen, Biometrics for an Ageing Society Societal and Ethical Factors in Biometrics and Ageing. Int. Conf. of the Biometrics Special Interest Group (BIOSIG), 1–4 (2012)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    S. Prabhakar, S. Pankanti, A.K. Jain, Biometric recognition: Security and privacy concerns. IEEE Secur. Priv. 2, 33–42 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    E. Mordini, C. Petrini, Ethical and social implications of biometric identification technology. Ann Ist Super Sanità 43(1), 5–11 (2007)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    S.C. Dass, Y. Zhu, A.K. Jain, Validating a biometric authentication system: Sample size requirements. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 28(12), 1902–1913 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    C. Costanzo, Suddenly, biometric ID doesn’t seem like science fiction. Am. Bank. 171(107), 6–11 (2006)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    L. Hunter, A. Orr, B. White, Towards a framework for promoting financial stability. Reserve Bank N. Z. Res. Bull. 69(1), 5–17 (2006)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    M.S. Obaidat, N. Boudriga, Security of E-Systems and Computer Networks (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sudeep Tanwar
    • 1
  • Sudhanshu Tyagi
    • 2
  • Neeraj Kumar
    • 3
  • Mohammad S. Obaidat
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringInstitute of Technology, Nirma UniversityAhmedabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Electronics & Communication EngineeringThapar Institute of Engineering and Technology Deemed to be UniversityPatialaIndia
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringThapar Institute of Engineering and Technology Deemed to be UniversityPatialaIndia
  4. 4.Fordham UniversityNew York CityUSA
  5. 5.ECE DepartmentNazarbayev UniversityAstanaKazakhstan
  6. 6.King Abdullah II School of Information Technology (KASIT), University of JordanAmmanJordan
  7. 7.University of Science and Technology Beijing (USTB)BeijingChina

Personalised recommendations