If you have to go to the database, you've already lost.Originally Posted by Global Scout
Regardless of how identity is established, gloss over validation and none of it does you any good. Used to be if someone showed up on post, he not only had his papers but could give you the name of someone who could vouch for him. Trust is a weakness, but a web of trust is considerably less weaker than any scheme that attempts to establish bona fides de novo.
PH Cannady
Correlate Systems
I'm just wondering how those who are apparently writing off biometrics as just another technology toy would propose that we do track adversaries in an environment where the otherguys aren't wearing uniforms, wearing distinctive markings or badges, or doing anything else that make them stand out from the greater 'the people' mass? Adversaries proven quite comfortable and able in taking the fight from the conventional battlefield to the home front...Gone are the days of conventional uniforms, symbols, and equipment that make the enemy easily identifiable. Now identifying a threat is as difficult as ever. In the digital age, photo IDs, identification cards, and other official documents are becoming less effective. Biometrics has emerged as a growing capability that addresses this issue.
Biometrics may not add measurably to our ability to predict and interdict attacks but they certainly do not reduce our ability to track attackers after an event...nature of the beast in this operating environment is that prediction has ceded in a large part to responsiveness...and those think think that such technologies are not here and in use domestically jujst need to come through the international arrivals terminal at LAX...
To improve the operational use of biometrics...strive towards a common standard for biometric measurements; work towards linked and interoperable biometric databases; get the kit on the streets and start using it.
The times are a-changing but then they always have been - things have never been static and we don't live now, for better AND worse, than we did ten years ago, twenty years ago, fifty or one hundred years ago...
The challenge posed by fighting dirty has little bearing on whether biometrics holds promise or none, or encompasses risks in and of itself. Personally, I'm doubtful of technology that left unattended can be defeated by tape recorder, hostage, appropriated body parts or some combination thereof.
PH Cannady
Correlate Systems
I'm not sure I see how biometrics would help differentiate between a Taliban fighter and a villager. Or between a villager and that same villager after he signs up with (or gets shanghaid into) the Taliban.
panopticon
Biometrics are a key enabler in the panopticon if you can not conceal your identity then you would be deterred from the dark side it is truly a game changer as it continues to evolve it would allow for greater social control
It would help, yeah, but such a system would have to collect, verify, and cross-index biometric data very quickly and very accurately in huge volumes, and remain extremely secure. Those limitations seem pretty daunting to me, though I'm not an expert.
And if we did manage to create a system with that sort of capability, I'd fight it with guns, bombs, knives, fists, and teeth. Those who give up liberty for security etcetera etcetera.
If...?
Don't get a passport then...or join any of the services - not just for the US but any of the 5 eyes nations...and certainly don't 'them' record your photo for your drivers' license...
This technology not only exists but it is here and in daily use...
There's a little bit of a difference between my driver's license--or my expired military ID card, for that matter--and the complete lack of anonymity that was described in the post I was responding to.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks