The Gun Counter

I know we've discussed things like this before.

Suppose you try to base things on algorithms derived from 3D scans of the blood vessels in fingers.

Pass a test of some kind, and that licensing agency records that you are now licensed.

Open a bank account, take a job, etc - no numbers to steal, no names to imitate, with any meaning, no IDs to forge, etc.

How often do you have to get re-licensed?

Financial/personal situations are ever-changing.

There are far more knowledgable people here about information systems, but I don't see why that would pose a problem

The SS number got used, even though it was forbidden to do so, because it was so handy

Shouldn't be too hard to use the output off a thumb pattern instead.

Aglifter wrote:There are far more knowledgable people here about information systems, but I don't see why that would pose a problem

The SS number got used, even though it was forbidden to do so, because it was so handy

Shouldn't be too hard to use the output off a thumb pattern instead.

Many people (laborers) don't have easily recognizable thumb prints. Biometrics are OK, but a simple double blind password with an ID card is equally effective and less technologically intensive. (password on chip, plus password typed in by user, neither item knows the other)

Any time that you have information on a computer, you risk it being compromised.

Jered wrote:Any time that you have information on a computer, you risk it being compromised.

100% agree... however, where do you suppose biometrics would be stored?

I think that was his point.

A) I was talking about a blood vessel scan, not a thumb print.

B) why would all the systems have to talk to one another? I figured the whole benefit would be that a system would be independent from one another.

I realize I have a simplistic view, but right now, our identity is a series of numbers, all lynch pinned on our SS number. All I am proposing is to remove the lynch pin, and replace the small numbers w something a bit more complex, mathematically, but something which cannot be a problem for modern computers.

Say you first do voter registration and drivers licenses that way. Or a transaction system - perhaps paired w a token from the client's smart phone - offer the consumer a way to eliminate the need for a wallet, and the need to interact w a person, to give his name, etc.

You are proposing removing one linchpin and replacing it with another. And the point still stands, that anything that is stored on a computer may become compromised. And even if the generated "key" is not shared between computers (I assume you mean it would have to be regenerated for each system or terminal the user accesses?), the inevitable security failure will result in the theft of the data that could potentially be used to access every other system that the user accesses using the biometric.

The way systems are now, if I use different passwords for each system that I must use, and employ good password practices, then the compromise should at least be limited to whatever system gets cracked. Furthermore, while I may resist revealing my password(s) to captors up to the limit of my physical and emotional abilities (depending on the exact techniques employed), my hand can certainly be severed from my body and used to get past said biometric access systems, regardless of my physical and emotional pain thresholds.

Use of the SSN as a universal identifier is a different problem, and one that will only be solved through legal and political means. Without first ending that practice, your proposed biometric scheme will just result in the loss of more personally identifiable data.