Comment There ARE privacy concerns, but it's workable. (Score 1) 578
First, to those people who make the declaration "Don't be so paranoid, they can take your fingerprints from a door handle or a cup", I retort that you should then have no problem complying with a requirement from an employer/bank/whatever to take your DNA and keep it on file, because obviously they could just get it form a piece of hair or skin you leave around everywhere(welcome to Gattica!). That argument is a batch of crap. The taking of fingerprints is absolutely an invasion of privacy for those who are concerned about malice or undesired use/supeona of the information. And the people making the argument that a hash or encoding of the fingerprint data makes it impossible to use as evidence doesn't understand that law enforcement, etc. can fairly easily obtain that hash, then get a second scan from you and compare the hashes in order to positively identify you.
All that being said, most fingerprint scanners used for timeclocks, door locks, etc. don't store the data with sufficient precision to use it as credible evidence that the scan was you. This is part of why they are both non-trivial and pretty easy to fake. It's precisely that dual, semi-contradictory nature of fingerprint scanners that make them so useful as a biometric access device.
Of course, you have no idea if the biometric scanners used by this university have that kind of precision, so it's probably best for both you and the university if they simply modify the policy to state that the precision of data the devices gather do not and shall not be able to qualify as proof of identity of in a court of law.
Then you're clear. Your biometric data at that point has the same significance as an ID badge. Any use of that data as evidence must be corroborated.
It might not have been such a good idea to contact a paper or other news outlet unless the university refused to clarify their agreement.
All that being said, most fingerprint scanners used for timeclocks, door locks, etc. don't store the data with sufficient precision to use it as credible evidence that the scan was you. This is part of why they are both non-trivial and pretty easy to fake. It's precisely that dual, semi-contradictory nature of fingerprint scanners that make them so useful as a biometric access device.
Of course, you have no idea if the biometric scanners used by this university have that kind of precision, so it's probably best for both you and the university if they simply modify the policy to state that the precision of data the devices gather do not and shall not be able to qualify as proof of identity of in a court of law.
Then you're clear. Your biometric data at that point has the same significance as an ID badge. Any use of that data as evidence must be corroborated.
It might not have been such a good idea to contact a paper or other news outlet unless the university refused to clarify their agreement.
