A cursory search on this site will show that I am constantly concerned about the infringement of technology on our privacy. In this era, where many people think nothing of carrying around our most sensitive information on our smartphones, this desire to protect our privacy may seem futile. But it’s all about striking a balance right? Even I (someone who rarely saves anything to the cloud and uses only the minimum number of “essential” apps) am willing to sacrifice some of my privacy for convenience. Actually, right now I am looking into one of those fitness tracker wristbands because I need a motivational kick to get me to go the extra mile with my workouts - a relatively frivolous reason in the grand scheme of things.
While I was in the process of searching for this device, I came across an ad for a regular lock (like you would use in a locker) that uses your fingerprint as the key. What?! In this era of hackers, have we really become so lax in the use of our biometric identifiers (i.e. our traits like fingerprints, etc.) that cannot be changed?! Don't you think we may be sliding too far down the slippery slope between privacy and convenience?
With this in mind, Joseph Steinberg from Forbes is adamant that you should never use your fingerprint to protect your smartphone (if you have a model that comes with a fingerprint reader). This is because, if you choose to do otherwise, you would be leaving yourself exposed to 4 major legal consequences:
1. Fingerprint-based "authentication suffers from a problem that either legitimate users are going to occasionally be denied access, or inappropriate users are going to sometimes gain unauthorized access.” For example, in 2013 claims were made that TouchID's 3-D analysis would protect again the unauthorized use of lifted fingerprints. Despite these assurances, hackers were still able to break this system. Smartphone manufacturers are once again making similar claims to those made back in 2013; how do we know if these will hold up over time?
2. Did you know that in many jurisdictions, police have to get a warrant to search your phone if it is secured with a password? However, if your phone is only secured by a fingerprint reader - you get no such protection. The police can search our sensitive information at will; no warrant needed!
3. We all remember how the NSA Spying Program right? This is where the government – with the help of cell phone carriers – was secretly given access to our phone data without our knowledge consent. “What would happen if the government once again ‘asked’ phone manufacturers to create a back door to store or send it [our] fingerprint information..."? Do you trust that the phone companies would stand up to the government?
4. Though these companies all promise that our fingerprints are not being collected into a database, how can we be sure that criminals will not find a way to get access to this information anyway? “Unlike passwords, fingerprints cannot be reset – if a criminal obtains a fingerprint along with the user’s identification information he can potentially use it to steal the user’s identity and commit crimes for decades; evildoers certainly have the incentive to look for ways."
Look, as I said before, we all have to choose a balance between our needs for privacy and convenience. However, to potentially give criminals, corporations and the government unfettered access to unchangeable biometric identifiers - that is intrinsic only to you - is a very high price for the convenience of not having to remember a password or carry a key around.
Like what you just read? Follow us to keep up to date with all of our postings and activities
If you want access to FREE Legal Help for your business, click on the button below to
