Endpoint // Authentication
8/12/2014
03:45 PM
Sara Peters
Sara Peters
Quick Hits
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

UK Reconsidering Biometrics

Parliament is looking for answers about biometrics' privacy, security, future uses, and whether or not legislation is ready for what comes next.

Two years after the UK government decommissioned its controversial Iris Recognition Immigration System, Parliament has launched an inquiry into both the public and private sector's current and future uses of biometrics.

From the Parliament reference document:

    Commercial organisations, however, are starting to play a greater role in both developing and using biometric data and technologies. It is anticipated that this trend will continue over the next decade, particularly as the financial costs, and computational resources required, decrease. Some commercial uses are already mainstream. Social media sites offer facial recognition software to assist users tagging uploaded photos, while accessing some mobile phones depends on fingerprint recognition rather than entering a passcode. Supporters contend that technologies relying on biometric data have transformed identity authentication. However, concerns continue to be raised about data protection, loss of privacy and identity theft.

Though the IRIS system was shut down after eight years of use, the UK still uses biometric systems for e-passports and residence permits.

The Parliament Science and Technology Committee is seeking answers to questions about research and development priorities; potential uses of biometrics; the challenges of developing, implementing, and regulating biometric technology; and the effectiveness of current legislation in governing the ownership of biometric data and who can collect, store, and use it.

The deadline to submit comments to Parliament is Sep. 26.

Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Robert McDougal
50%
50%
Robert McDougal,
User Rank: Ninja
8/16/2014 | 10:29:10 AM
Re: Security, privacy
I agree that we need more security, but I also agree we need to find the balance with privacy.  Something along the lines of using biometrics for authentication but not keeping records for longer than 90 days.
frank_lawrence
50%
50%
frank_lawrence,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/14/2014 | 12:59:11 PM
Re: Security, privacy
Not necessarily. Having stronger authenitcation would make it more difficult to have someone exploit your authenticator to see your information - which is only one aspect.  Using the same username (or biometric authenticator) could facilitate correlating access to two entirely different system - which may allow for unwanted leakage of private information.  If I have two completely unrelated username/password combination - the act of authenticating to two separate suites is more difficult correlate.  If one is facebook (where I have probably exposed to myuch info) and another is a health related web site which I have not talked about - being able to link the two could be a bad thing.

 

Larry
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
8/14/2014 | 11:37:39 AM
Re: Security, privacy
Whoopty, wouldn't having more a secure form of authentication such as biometrics give you more privacy protection, not less? 
Whoopty
50%
50%
Whoopty,
User Rank: Ninja
8/13/2014 | 11:17:26 AM
Security, privacy
While I really like the idea of biometrics being used for security - I have to remember too many passwords as it is - I'm wary of activity trackers and similar devices with lax privacy policies. I really don't want my insurance firm trying to find out anything about my health through a third party, or my bank checking my health to see how it would affect a mortgage. 

Some information should remain personal.
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-4231
Published: 2015-07-03
The Python interpreter in Cisco NX-OS 6.2(8a) on Nexus 7000 devices allows local users to bypass intended access restrictions and delete an arbitrary VDC's files by leveraging administrative privileges in one VDC, aka Bug ID CSCur08416.

CVE-2015-4232
Published: 2015-07-03
Cisco NX-OS 6.2(10) on Nexus and MDS 9000 devices allows local users to execute arbitrary OS commands by entering crafted tar parameters in the CLI, aka Bug ID CSCus44856.

CVE-2015-4234
Published: 2015-07-03
Cisco NX-OS 6.0(2) and 6.2(2) on Nexus devices has an improper OS configuration, which allows local users to obtain root access via unspecified input to the Python interpreter, aka Bug IDs CSCun02887, CSCur00115, and CSCur00127.

CVE-2015-4237
Published: 2015-07-03
The CLI parser in Cisco NX-OS 4.1(2)E1(1), 6.2(11b), 6.2(12), 7.2(0)ZZ(99.1), 7.2(0)ZZ(99.3), and 9.1(1)SV1(3.1.8) on Nexus devices allows local users to execute arbitrary OS commands via crafted characters in a filename, aka Bug IDs CSCuv08491, CSCuv08443, CSCuv08480, CSCuv08448, CSCuu99291, CSCuv0...

CVE-2015-4239
Published: 2015-07-03
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software 9.3(2.243) and 100.13(0.21) allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) by sending crafted OSPFv2 packets on the local network, aka Bug ID CSCus84220.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Marc Spitler, co-author of the Verizon DBIR will share some of the lesser-known but most intriguing tidbits from the massive report