By Andy McCue, 12 August 2004 17:45
COMMENT After disappearing down an underground maze of passages at the UK Passport Service (UKPS) headquarters and being taken into a bright white room, I come around feeling slightly dazed and notice a bump in my neck that feels like an electronic chipÂ…
OK, that's what many people would like us to believe registering for a biometric ID card is like, but - whatever your personal views on the pros and cons of the controversial scheme - the truth couldn't be further from that fiction.
This is what I experienced...
It's a sunny summer afternoon and I'm sitting in the bustling main passport application waiting room in London. I'm here to enrol as one of the 10,000 volunteers in the UK government's biometric ID card trial and check out the process for myself.
A small side room off the main waiting room contains a large booth with a curtain around it. Inside a chair sits in front of a desk with one machine that scans the iris and takes a facial biometric, and another machine that takes a fingerprint scan. For good measure there is a screen to sign an electronic signature on.
In reality when the government does introduce ID cards it will contain only one, or possibly two at most, biometrics. The aim of the trial is to test the enrolment process for each of the different biometrics to see how easy they are and also test them for accuracy.
I'm ushered into the booth and take a seat in front of the camera, which sits at face height. First up is the facial biometric. I simply sit still for a few seconds while various unique facial measurements are scanned and recorded.
Then I position my eyes so they are looking into the iris scanner. A computer voice prompt tells you to move closer or further away until you are in the right position and after some whirring and a couple of camera clicks, the iris scan is done.
The UKPS operator taking my scans says there have been none of the problems highlighted earlier this year by MPs from the Home Affairs Select Committee who claimed long eyelashes, watery eyes and eye complaints could render iris scanning useless for large numbers of the population.
She said the guides on the iris scanning machine and the computer voice prompt will ensure peoples' eyes are aligned correctly with the reader. And speaking as someone with long eyelashes I certainly didn't have any problems on the day.
Next up is the fingerprint scanner. It looks much like a scaled-down version of a regular computer scanner with a glass screen. First you put your four left fingers on the screen, then the thumb, and repeat the process for the right hand.
The system enables the operator to check all the prints scanned are of a good enough quality to be used. Ones that aren't are highlighted and are simply taken again. Because all the fingers and thumbs are scanned it also isn't an issue for people with the odd digit missing.
Interestingly, the Home Office spokesman accompanying me through the trial says that a database of one million fingerprint scans has been imported from abroad for use during the trial to ensure that there is a big enough volume to check how accurate the matching process is with the 10,000 prints taken during the trial.
After giving an electronic signature, volunteers will then be given a few minutes to fill out a questionnaire asking them about how they comfortable they felt using each of the biometrics and how intrusive they thought each was.
Less than 15 minutes after starting the biometric trial, the UKPS operator hands me my very own biometric ID card. It's only a demonstration one and can't be used anywhere but the chip on it does contain my biometrics. Volunteers then get to choose one of the biometrics so it can be tested against the card.
I opt for the iris scan. The card is put into a reader and I sit in front of the iris scanner again. A problem with the server connection means it doesn't register first time but a few seconds later I get a correct match. The process has been smooth and painless and taken quarter of an hour with all three biometrics. The UKPS is currently getting through about four people an hour.
The Home Office is still cagey on how the trials are progressing. Testing started in April in London, followed by Glasgow, Leicester and Newcastle. A mobile unit has been to Peterborough, Sheffield, Middlesbrough, Macclesfield, and Birmingham, and is going on to Swansea, Taunton, Torquay and Belfast.
Just over half the 10,000 volunteers needed have taken part so far and the Home Office anticipates the trials will run into September. I am also assured that all the data collected during the trials will be completely destroyed at the end of it all.
No stats are yet available on the failure and success rates of the different biometrics but a full government report is due out later in the year after the trials finish.
The trials are a valuable insight into how a biometric ID card will work but there are still many hurdles ahead for the government. Not only is the Cabinet seemingly split on whether ID cards are a huge waste of money but there also remains a strong groundswell of opposition from civil liberties groups. Still, Home Secretary David Blunkett is determined to push the bill through Parliament and it looks more likely to a case of how and when rather than if.
Got any questions about biometrics in any form - whether for ID cards, passports or additional security in the physical or digital world? Then put them to our panel of experts.
Comments
There are 18 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
It's interesting that 1 million fingerprints were imported from abroad to aid in the trial. I wonder if they were from UK citizens scanned at US immigration; now the authorities possibly have fingerprints from innocent UK travelling citizens, are they committed to destroying that data as well?
2. Ken Hall
It's also interesting that the same polling organisation that came up with the totally misleading figure of 80% aproval rating for the cards (80% of people would like to have an ID card) is the same organisation awarded the contract to recruit the volunteers for the scheme.
Very dodgy that. Would they have got the contract had 80% been against Bio-ID cards. (An honest poll in other words)
The 80% in favour figure is misleading due to the fact that when asked if people would like a compulsary biometric ID card that they have to pay £40.00 themselves, most were against. When the prospect of having to use the card for everyday transactions and having a risk profile built-up from those transactions to be stored on a national database that can be used to decide entitlements, that figure drops even further.
That is Blunkett's plan, although a RFID micro-chip in the arm (Verichip (TM) 'Get Chipped (TM)' style) may be cheaper and more applicable by 2013.
For those who think micro-chipping the population is a paranoid delusion of the wacko conspiracy theorists, check out http://www.adsx.com/prodservpart/verichippreregistration.html
It's already happening. When the technology matures, there will be pressure to chip everybody. Also look up the hegalian dialectic, or problem, reaction, solution.
3. anonymous
I did some back of a fag packet calculations about how long it would take to bio-id the UK population.
Assuming people had to take a minimum of one hour off to go and get scanned and an average hourly wage of £12 pounds an hour. That is (59 million x 12) £708m quid lost earnings for the economy and for the individual.
(Ed note. You've included a lot of people in your calaculation who don't earn any wage - retired and under 16. Also you are factoring in people who don't need to apply... though you did admit this is only 'fag packet' stuff, so carry on...)
Also assuming 15 minutes is the time it would take to be correctly scanned it would take (15 x 59 million) minutes to scan everyone assuming someone must be available to supervise the process it would take around 7375 working years to do it which taking average wages (Bloomberg £476 a week) would cost £175m to pay people to do it.
The average cost of running a single office workstation including office space in the south east for a year is about £12,500 (Total Office Cost Survey) so the cost for office space for the workers is around £90m.
So we are talking about over a billion pounds just to start the ball rolling. Without even buying a single card printer, scanning machine, microchip or the a computer system large enough to cope with it. According to the Home Office this would have to occur every ten years so it is a recurring cost.
So over the average lifetime of the UK individual 8 updates will be required so as a country we will spend in the order of 80 Billion pounds on IDing the population during their lives.
These figures do not include the scanners, cards, printers, microchips and database costs.
I can think of better places to spend that sort of money.
4. Mike Mitchell
If processing is being done at the rate of 4 people an hour, that's 96 per day, 672 a week, and just under 35,000 a year. Meanwhile people are dying off all the time, rendering the processing effort for them on the Monday totally redundant by Friday.
Obviously UKPS will need to blitz the country with processing units in order to complete ID card scanning for the whole of the population in anything approaching a reasonable time frame. Do the sums: 40 million people divided by 35,000 is considerably more than 1,000 years! Can we wait that long to be safe from Uncle Osama?
5. Bob Robinson
It is strange that so many anti ID card people totally ignore the realities. If they think that the government or security services around the world let alone this country cannot monitor almost all of our activities now then perhaps they don't use credit cards, banks, are self employed casual laborers and don't use the internet.
Personally I am in favour of a more positive form of ID that is compulsory, that hopefully will in the future reduce the number of cards I need to carry and reduce the forms of evidence of ID I need to produce to buy or sell a house, open a bank account, take up a credit card or apply for a loan. I would be able to use the same card to show as a driving licence or passport, as a credit and debit card and a mondex replacement. If it is chipped into my arm all the better it will make it more dificult to loose or get stolen. I'll probably be dead before all this happens as I'm coming upt to retirement age now. Oh I forgot it could replace my bus pass and pension book.
6. Roy Corneloues
Remember that in that 15 minutes more biometric data was taken than would be if/when the process is rolled out for real. Plus they were using different devices for capturing all the biometrics.
All the issues described above would obviously be taken in to consideration when designing the single unit that would take all the necessary information in one go.
I'm sure they will be working towards a maximum of 5 minutes per application and the unit will be portable enought to take in to the workplace (much like giving blood), therefore removing a vast amount of the waste predicted by the original post here.
However this will probably all go pear shaped because if the usual government contractors are assigned to do the work it will take 5 times as long cost 10 times as much and will be wholly inefficient...
7. Richard
None of this explains how my carrying a biometric id will stop a convert to religious or political extremism acting as a terrorist.
I hope we would spot Osama Bin Laden boarding at Heathrow but how would biometric IDs have detected Richard Reid, the (praise be to Allah) failed shoe bomber, or any of the September 11th murderers?
8. Ken Hall
Bob Robinson, You may be chipped if you wish. I and almost every other anti ID-card person I have communicated with will have no problem with you being chipped. However, why should I as an innocent citizen have to prove my innocence and identity in a free country?
If you want to be a chipped drone then fine. Why should I forgo my freedom to satisfy your paranoid desires to be kept safe from some obscure, mutating, fraudulent danger. If you get your way, who would keep us safe from a totalitarian police state?
The desire of the corrupt polititian in years to come can only be prevented by removing his tools. The compulsary bio-ID card or implanted RFID chip is a central tool of the totalitarian toolkit.
Without it there can be no totalitarianism. There is no freedom unless you have the freedom to say NO!
9. anonymous
Interesting how some anti-ID card comments are put on line here. Particularly by readers who quite willingly fill in their name, job, and location when they send in their comments...who needs ID cards to satisfy my "paranoid desires" when we have hypocrites like that!
10. anonymous
Washing Machines?
Are they doing any testing on what happens if you leave your card in your pocket when it goes through the washing machine? If presenting them is compulsory, what happens if I'm awaiting a replacement - am I under effective house arrest? Or can I show a note to say mine is missing? If I can, then what's the point?
The whole idea is completely daft - most terrorists work under their own names when they commit an act. Any person currently in the UK under false ID would get an ID card under this system, and would then be even harder to trap. The idea is a perpetual aim for Whitehall who have a knee-jerk reaction to track everything, without really knowing why. Public opinion sees through this, so they try to slip it in slowly in the hope we won't notice. And the press being what they are, it will probably work.
Personally, mine will "accidentally" get washed often.
11. Richard Gurney
I don't really have an issue with being required to have an ID Card or even having to carry one all the time.
What I object to is having to pay for it.
12. Goten Xiao
So, Ken, do you believe that the police should be abolished, that schools should be abolished, and that law in general should be abolished?
We can't say no to education (from ages 4 to roughly 17), we can't ignore laws when we like and we definitely can't say no to the police busting in because you're brewing crystal meth.
I have no problem with biometric ID. It's no different than a passport or a driver's licence. I have no objection to being RFID chipped -
we could get stuff for the home like identity-specific doors or RFID readers for computers for nearly 100% secure logon; even readers for cars so we get automatic door unlocking etc.
I must admit that anonymity has its charms, but that's in an environment where proper identification isn't required. I'd much rather have a very secure identification method so no-one could possibly steal credit or debit cards, passports or driver's licences. Or, more correctly, no one could use them.
13. M Masiak
Micro-chipping the population has been occurring every year in the London Marathon; its the way to track all the runners times. A small chip is placed in the trainer and scanners are deployed around the track which feed back to the central computers.
It’s the back of a fag packet sceptics that are often, err, wrong, and disperse fear into the masses. I’m sure that on the back of the fag packet it says something about death is a merciful reward. Logically it will cost more money, but the financial benefits are the measurements that need deducting. The staffing etc are already there in the UKPO so remove their cost, locations are already owned by the crown so remove that cost, I would imagine renewals could be verified very quickly, a finger print is always a finger print (except for the extraordinary occasions). Commercial gain from financial institutions dynamic linking (that profile linking fear thing – already exists and you’re on it, http://www.experian.com). Initially there will be some outlay to advancement but the government wouldn’t attain improvement for a project if there wasn’t some sort of gain.
AND... somewhat in agreement with Goten Xiao, although comments about identity theft will also be true, the ability in adapting (sounds like the borg) to the hack attempts (phishing) will be easier to detect and resolve with a genetic fingerprint, ehm what about human cloning, it will never happen, until 5:30pm last Friday when the first Human Cloning licenses were issued. The cost in copying genetics and the complexity seems like Sci-Fi, but it wasn’t that long ago when IBM said something along the lines of the world only needing 4 computers.
Well there’s my Minority Report…
14. Guy Herbert
Richard Gurney: There's no such thing as a free lunch. _Somebody_ has to pay for the biggest government IT project ever. That means higher-than-otherwise taxes for everyone, higher prices to take account of the compliance costs for businesses, and lower earnings to the extent that snafus in running the sytem reduce individual productivity. Regardless of the nominal price tag, you'll end up paying.
15. M Masiak
Micro-chipping the population has been occurring every year in the London Marathon; its the way to track all the runners times. A small chip is placed in the trainer and scanners are deployed around the track which feed back to the central computers.
It’s the back of a fag packet sceptics that are often, err, wrong, and disperse fear into the masses. I’m sure that on the back of the fag packet it says something about death is a merciful reward. Logically it will cost more money, but the financial benefits are the measurements that need deducting. The staffing etc are already there in the UKPO so remove their cost, locations are already owned by the crown so remove that cost, I would imagine renewals could be verified very quickly, a finger print is always a finger print (except for the extraordinary occasions). Commercial gain from financial institutions dynamic linking (that profile linking fear thing – already exists and you’re on it, http://www.experian.com). Initially there will be some outlay to advancement but the government wouldn’t attain improvement for a project if there wasn’t some sort of gain.
AND... somewhat in agreement with Goten Xiao, although comments about identity theft will also be true, the ability in adapting (sounds like the borg) to the hack attempts (phishing) will be easier to detect and resolve with a genetic fingerprint, ehm what about human cloning, it will never happen, until 5:30pm last Friday when the first Human Cloning licenses were issued. The cost in copying genetics and the complexity seems like Sci-Fi, but it wasn’t that long ago when IBM said something along the lines of the world only needing 4 computers.
Well there’s my Minority Report…
16. Karen Challinor
It's not the card I'm objecting to although I don't see why I have to buy my own identity, carry it at all times in case I'm searched or need to present it to anyone who asks. Or for that matter why I need to pay for the infrastructure to make it work, which it won't, but I digress, I've ranted about these issues at length before.
What I really object to is the associated information that goes with it.
I have no objection to the government having my iris scan, retina scan, fingerprint, DNA, signature and inside leg measurement on file along with my entire life history as long as they demonstrate a legitemate reason for needing the information and can provide adequate safeguards against its misuse and misappropriation.
To date have not done this and are refusing to allow an open debate to bring such a reason to light.
I suspect the real reason is that Mr Blunkett has been told it would be a really good idea, by someone who wishes to distract attention from their own project.
17. anonymous
Fingerprints - well what a surprise about concern about destruction rather than look at the more positive aspects. As one of the 10,000 I cannot see the experiment's method being adopted as it's very time consuming, using a water-based process, but if they could find an easier method of capturing those of EVERY person in the UK the benefits must outweigh the perceived civil libertarian advantages of desctruction.
18. John Herring
'Your Biometric ID has been compromised - please renew your fingerprint / retina.'
So what happens now?
It could be a bit uncomfortable - look out for passport officers with larger than normal light pens I guess...