[wordup] Anti-Terrorist Brain/Iris Fingerprinting

[Adam Shand]

I am reminded of two things while reading this article.

 1. A salesman trying to convince me to buy something I don't want.
 2. Voigt-Kampff tests in Bladerunner.

I have no idea as to the scientific legitimacy of this, if anyone knows
more about this please let me know.  However what I do know is that I'm
pretty sure that it can't do both of these things at the same time:

 * "The association of iris data and your name is strictly optional and at
   your discretion (unless you have been arrested). You may choose to be
   tested totally anonymously without having to produce any ID whatsoever."

 * "By requiring their use at these places, the FBI can not only keep
   terrorists from entering, but can capture a suspect for arrest or
   questioning. An iris scanner can tell the operator to have security
   hold a suspect that the FBI has tagged in the iris database.
   Alternatively, the FBI can just use this information to track the
   movements of suspects without arousing suspicion. All of this is
   impossible to do today."

We need to stop looking for easy solutions.  Just as hackers have been
routinely circumventing anti-piracy products for XXX, so will terrorists
circumvent anti-terrorism techniques.  The true solution is to figure out
why this happened, what we can do to solve the original problem and the
new ones that have evolved and then take action to resolve those issues.
The scary news is that this will certainly take years and more likely
decades.

Bottom line, we already live in fear.  Fear of disease, drunk drivers,
riots, police brutality, crazy neighbors, rapists, food poisoning, etc.
This is just one more fear, and we will deal with it as we deal with all
other fears.  What changed on September 11th was that we now have a *new*
fear, one that we haven't had time to acclimatize to yet.  We will deal
with our fear both as a nation and individually in time, in the mean while
that last thing we need is another technological device designed to
protect us from our fear by separating us from what's actually important,
that we live our lives with joy.

Peace,
Adam.

Via: Paul Holman <pablos at kadrevis.com>
From: http://www.skirsch.com/politics/plane/ultimate.htm

Identifying terrorists before they strike

Steve Kirsch, stk at propel.com

ABSTRACT: Brain fingerprinting, a technique proven infallible in FBI tests
and US Navy tests and accepted as evidence in US courts, can be applied to
a new problem: the problem of accurately identifying trained terrorists
before they strike. Had it been in place on September 11, it would have
prevented all of the attackers from boarding the planes. It is the only
technology for preventing other terrorist attacks before they are carried
out. For example, it is the only system that will allow us to accurately
identify all members of al Qaeda so we can keep them off our planes today
and prevent them from entering our country.

The "computerized security screen" described in this paper and the
calculation of test results are all done totally under computer control;
testing requires no human intervention and no human interpretation. In the
case of the FBI tests, 100% of the determinations were correct. There were
no false positives, no false negatives, and no indeterminates. Eight years
later there is still no other technology or manual screening that comes
close to these results. Brain fingerprinting has been used to exonerate
and well as to convict and it has succeeded in difficult cases where all
other methods have failed.

In this document, we describe how, by combining brain fingerprinting
technology with iris identification, we can construct a system that
combines high security with convenience. It is a system that cannot be
fooled, can probe more areas than a typical manual screen, and is
dramatically more convenient and more accurate than manual security
questioning. The system described here is much more than just a high-tech,
more effective version of the security questions that they ask on El Al
flights. In addition, it also provides instant positive authentication at
very low cost virtually anywhere in the country. So you get the benefits
of an in-depth security screen everywhere in the country without cost or
inconvenience.

In our system, you are given a 10 minute computerized security screen only
once every few years (and when necessary if a new threat is identified),
to determine your "security risk profile." This can be done on the day of
travel or anytime in advance, at your convenience. Once your data (your
iris data, name, and brain fingerprint security screen test results) are
entered into a federal databank, it is inexpensive and quick (under 1
second) to authenticate you at airports, sports arenas, public buildings,
etc. In fact, only an Internet connection (which could be wireless) is
required for authentication. Where iris scans are cost prohibitive, an ID
card used in conjunction with a biometric sensor (such as fingerprints,
hand geometry, etc) can be used to achieve nearly equivalent speed,
convenience, accuracy, and confidence. Depending on your risk profile and
the current entry policy of the place you want to enter, you may or may
not be allowed access.

The system does not violate anyone's civil liberties. Unlike a human
screener, it cannot discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, sex,
religion, etc. It is not a psychological profile. The computer cannot
determine how you feel about anything. It is best equated to an automated
version of the Yes/No security screening questions we have today.
Essentially, it is nothing more than a sequence of "Have you seen this
item before?" questions. You may review the questions in advance and you
may choose to halt the test at any time. Your answers cannot be used to
incriminate you.

The association of iris data and your name is strictly optional and at
your discretion (unless you have been arrested). You may choose to be
tested totally anonymously without having to produce any ID whatsoever. So
this is actually more protective of people's privacy than many of the
existing security screens that people accept today.

In order to account for possible negative public perception caused by a
lack of understanding of how the system works, the system should be phased
in over at least a year, and a manual screening option should be available
during this public phase-in acceptance period. Since all the terrorists in
the 9/11 attack arrived from outside the country, we could first require
its use on all people seeking entrance into the US from outside the
country (regardless of whether they are US citizens or not). The President
and members of Congress should also be screened before it is required of
the general public. However, for maximum effectiveness, the system should
be adopted at all airports world-wide so that we can restrict the movement
of terrorists without restricting the movement of the public at large.

Other benefits accrue from this system as well. Iris scanners are already
installed and in use today at select airports and sports arenas. By
requiring their use at these places, the FBI can not only keep terrorists
from entering, but can capture a suspect for arrest or questioning. An
iris scanner can tell the operator to have security hold a suspect that
the FBI has tagged in the iris database.  Alternatively, the FBI can just
use this information to track the movements of suspects without arousing
suspicion. All of this is impossible to do today. A national iris databank
can also be used for many positive things such as uniting parents with
children.

It is critical that the US government provide the funds to commercialize
the use of brain fingerprinting to identify terrorists, because it is the
most cost effective way to combat terrorism in the US. However, without
leadership from the FAA to require the use of this system at US airports,
this technology will not be commercially developed on its own for this
particular use.

Unlike most other approaches, the approach described here provides a
potent weapon on the war against terrorism while actually increasing
customer convenience and enhancing security against a wide range of
attacks making it at least 1,000 times more difficult for a terrorist to
escape detection .  At worst it adds only 1 second per authenticated entry
and typically only 10 minutes for a re-screening once every few years.

All the underlying technology necessary to implement the system described
in this document exists today; it just needs to be packaged for this new
application and installed in airports. In less than 90 days from receipt
of a request from the FAA, FBI, or Department of Transportation, we can
prove the concept is effective at identifying terrorists with over 90%
certainty for $100K (99.9% confidence is possible but will take more than
90 days). We can construct a prototype "airport scenario" (construction of
security screening booths, creation of all security checkpoint types, and
creation of software needed to run a large airport) for less than $50M in
less than 24 months.  All the technology is off-the-shelf and it's just a
packaging, programming, and system integration problem. By capitalizing on
new technologies, a system using the approach described here could be put
in place at all airports in the US in less than 4 years at a total
one-time capital equipment cost of under $1B, the majority of which can be
funded by private industry (the federal government would set the standards
and certify the manufacturers and periodically test and certify the
machines themselves).

Once the system is in place, the cost to install additional authentication
security checkpoints can be as low as $300 per station. Since the system
does not require labor beyond the personnel who are already manning
security checkpoints, check-in desks and boarding gates, and because
Internet connectivity is so inexpensive ($1K per month for a high traffic
airport), the system described here does not appreciably increase annual
operating costs to run an airport.

This system isn't perfect. It might allow 1 terrorist in 100 through. Is
there any other system that can determine an exact count of the number of
terrorists on a plane? Brain fingerprinting may sound silly. But consider
the alternative. Our next attack could be far worse. How many more people
will lose their lives before we take action? A million?

Is there a better alternative for protecting innocent lives?

<lots more at the web site> ...