The Use of Privacy Enhancing Aspects of Biometrics Biometrics as a PET (privacy enhancing technology) in the Dutch private and semi-public domain Tilburg University TILT – Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society P.O. Box 90153 5000 LE Tilburg The Netherlands <[email protected]> Paul de Hert Annemarie Sprokkereef January 2009 Centrum voor Recht, Technologie en Samenleving Postbus 90153 • 5000 LE Tilburg • Bezoekadres > Warandelaan 2 • Tilburg • Telefoon 013 466 81 99 • www.uvt.nl/tilt/ The Use of Privacy Enhancing Aspects of Biometrics The Use of Privacy Enhancing Aspects of Biometrics In the context of the main theme E-Participation/E Service of the “Alliantie Vitaal Bestuur” – EZ, BD, BZK This report concerns the question to what extent biometrics are used as a PET (Privacy Enhancing Technology) in the Netherlands. The key issues addressed are: - is PET a concept that plays a role in the use of biometrics in the semi-public and private domain; - Is the current regulatory framework appropriate for fostering privacy-enhancing employment of biometrics? The report consists of four parts: Chapter 1: The Legal Framework ........................................................................................ 4- 14 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 4-5 1.2 Legal Principles Governing Personal data...................................................................... 5-6 1.3 The European Data Protection Framework............................................................... 6-8 1.4 The Article 29 Data Protection Working Party........................................................... 8-9 1.5 Data Protection Agencies........................................................................................ 9-10 1.6 The Dutch Data Protection Authority (DPA) ............................................................. 10-14 1.7 Some Observations ................................................................................................ 14 Chapter 2: Biometrics as PET (Privacy Enhancing Technology)....................................... 15-22 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... ....... 15 2.2 Trends and Technologies......................................................................................... 15 2.3 The Concept of PET (Privacy Enhancing Technology)................................................. 16-18 2.4 Choice, Consent and Correction............................................................................... 19-20 2.5 Function Creep....................................................................................................... 20 2.6 Using Biometrics as PETs....................................................................................... 21-22 2.7 Some Observations................................................................................................. 22 Chapter 3: Small Scale Use of Biometrics in Practice 1 ........................................................ 23-38 3.1 Case Study Primary School ................................................................................... 24-26 3.1.1 Technical specifications.......................................................................................... 24 1 These case studies concern the use of finger scans in a primary school, a swimming pool, and a supermarket, and hand geometry in a private sports club. January 2009 TILT – Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society 2 The Use of Privacy Enhancing Aspects of Biometrics 3.1.2 PET Aspects........................................................................................................... 25 3.1.3 Other Aspects of the Implementation of this Biometric System.................................... 25 3.1.4 Main issues arising from Case Study One.................................................................. 26 3.2 Case Study Swimming Pool.................................................................................... 27-29 3.2.1 Technical specifications .......................................................................................... 27 3.2.2 PET Aspects.......................................................................................................... ........ 28 3.2.3 Other Aspects of the Implementation of this Biometric System.................................... 28-29 3.2.4 Issues Arising From Case Study Two..................................................................... 29-30 3.3 Case Study Supermarket....................................................................................... ...... 30-32 3.3.1 Technical Specifications......................................................................................... 30-31 3.3.2 Pet Aspects.......................................................................................................... ....... 31 3.3.3 Main issues arising from Case Study Three.............................................................. 31-32 3.4 Case Study Hand Geometry Reader at a Private Sports Club..................................... 33-35 3.4.1 Technical specifications ........................................................................................... 33 3.4.2 PET Aspects........................................................................................................... 34 3.4.3 Main Issues Arising from Case Study Four................................................................. 34-35 3.5 Some Observations on the difficulty of Drawing up an Inventory.................................... 35-37 3.6 Some Observations on the Four Case Studies Detailed Above..................................... 37-39 Chapter 4: Conclusions and Recommendations...................................................................... 40-43 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... ........ 44-47 Annex: Inventory.................................................................................................................. 48-51 We are indebted to Thijs Bosters, Karolina Owczinyk, and Irene Voets for their persistent efforts in gathering data for the inventory. Suad Cehajic has carried out most of the research for case study Two and Three. Vivian Carter has given excellent support throughout. We would like to extend our grateful thanks to the members of the Alliantie Vitaal Bestuur supervisory committee: Jaap-Henk Hoepman (TNO), Lotte Nijland and Tjabbe Bos (Dutch Ministry of Home Affairs) for their valuable comments and corrections. Any omissions/errors remaining are our own. January 2009 TILT – Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society 3 The Use of Privacy Enhancing Aspects of Biometrics Chapter 1 The Legal Framework 1.1 Introduction Technological progress in the development of biometric techniques is unmistakable. The technological functionality of available systems is maturing, showing improved capability. With biometric techniques, we refer to the identification or authentication of individuals based on a physical characteristic and using information technology and mathematical and statistical methods. 2 The average minister, official or parliamentarian involved in law making, will face difficulties in assessing the efficiency of the biometric techniques as used in commercial applications currently available on the market. The main reason for this is that the information available is often contradictory. According to a report of the TAB 3 the main problem is the blurring of boundaries between potential (=future) and current capacity of biometric applications. This is a source of technical and political confusion. 4 Even more complex, also for experts, is an assessment of the societal impact of the use of biometrics. 5 A systematic, constantly updated and forward looking analysis and assessment of the societal, economic and legal impact of further growth of the use biometric applications should inform the political process. This report should be seen in this light. It is primarily concerned with the regulation of the use of biometrics in the private sector in the Netherlands. It will focus on the evolving legal framework, the use of biometrics as PET and the use of biometrics in practice. This report will not discuss the current technical state of the art, unless it is directly relevant for a discussion of the legal framework or the concept of biometrics as a PET. 6 The first point we would like to make is that legislation has not acted as a barrier for biometric producers to place their products out on the public, semi public and private market. Over the last ten years, unlimited commercial possibilities have opened up in the areas of private electronic legal and commercial transactions, large scale national and international (EU) state systems (including production and use of millions of machine readable documents containing biometrics) and private and public sector arrangements of access to physical and electronic spaces. 7 In the EU, the existing data protection legislative framework governs the use of biometrics and there is no separate legislation. As the principled stand of data protection towards technology is characterised by an 'enabling logic' the law has not acted as a barrier to diffusion of biometric technologies. Whilst data protection legislation makes existing processing practices transparent, as a rule it does