Biometric technologies and plans for increased
surveillanceare jeopardising society's right
to liberty and privacy, David Murakami Wood, managing editor of
Surveillance & Society, said at theBiometrics
2007 conferencelast week.
Biometric technologies are increasingly emerging into society.
They were initially used in airports but are now
becoming commonplace in schools, bars and elsewhere, he
said.
"Now we are looking at mobile cameras, micro cameras, chips, and
smart dust. How can you regulate this, and where does it stop?" he
said.
"These technologies should enable people," he argued, not deny
them of their fundamental right to privacy. "The idea that people
should fit into the technology and behave to suit that technology
has emerged. This is wrong. It should be the other way round."
Military ideas are creeping into civilian society, said Wood,
describing "a society where security trumps civilian liberties",
and privacy becomes secondary.
"Britain has witnessed the implementation of incompetent
surveillance systems, and trust has been lost. How do we regain
that trust in the performance of technology?" At the moment, Wood
says, "The state sees the right to acquire our data as
paramount."
He listed charges and imprisonment for
ID card non-compliance as an example. "It's our personal data",
he argued. "Shouldn't the government pay to acquire our data?"
National databases, he said are a platform for prejudice. "On
the
national DNA database, there is preponderance of black men's
DNA. This is no coincidence. Why don't they just have everyone's
DNA? Where's the consistency?" asked Wood.
CCTV does not prevent crime, Wood argued. "It helps with
detecting after the crime has been committed, but it doesn't stop
it happening," he said. "Political figures are way too impressed
with the latest technologies. But we need to look into what we
really need, and not just jump on the latest 'new thing'."
He said people are becoming increasingly willing to share their
privacy - this can be seen in the huge increase in popularity of
social networking sites. But is offering ourselves up to
surveillance a step too far? "We need a reciprocal society where
surveillance and accountability are reciprocal. Liberty and privacy
should be an integral part of national security, not in opposition
to it. Technologies should be fitted to policies, not vice versa,"
said Wood.
"Everything the industry is doing is working towards a 'type' of
security. It's not just about individual competitions and
technology wars though. Technologists have a responsibility to
allow a societal debate, and maybe even start it," Wood told his
predominantly-technologist audience. "Because at the moment,
policy is still a long way behind technological development,"
he concluded.
A version of this article first appeared on the website of
Infosecurity
magazine.