

India To Biometrically Identify All Of Its 1.2 Billion Citizens - millerski150
http://singularityhub.com/2012/07/10/india-to-biometrically-identify-all-of-its-1-2-billion-citizens/

======
ashray
I think our HN conspiracy theorists have missed the point by a bit. Lets just
put it this way, India still has a ton of illiterate people. The only way that
they can usually sign documents/enter into contracts is by placing their
(inked) fingerprints on documents.

There is no unified ID system in India so far. There is no unique ID card that
each citizen can carry. This is a 21st century solution to a problem that has
existed for a long time.

You know how you open a bank account in India ?

\- Walk into the bank

\- Fill up a form

\- Provide a photograph

\- Provide a proof of ID (voter's ID, passport, etc.)

\- Provide a proof of address (this can be a voter's ID, utility bill, etc. -
has to be different from the one above..)

Here's where stuff starts to get real interesting. You can't get a voter's ID
without a proof of address (that can be a bank statement, utility bill, etc.)
- the same contraints apply to the others. So you can't get a proof of address
without a proof of address. See where this is going ? (or isn't :P)

The lack of a unified ID system in India is a massive problem. An Iris Scan +
Fingerprints are the only way to really ensure that a person is who they are
supposed to be. (many burn victims do not have fingerprints, many blind people
may not have irises)

Personally, I welcome the opportunity to be able to open a bank account/do
other administrative shit with just one ID card. I've had enough with all the
extra nonsensical documentation that every establishment requires.

I certainly see the privacy/trackability downside to it. But lets be honest.
I've been to the US and Europe. Their respective governments have my
fingerprints/iris scans (needed for visas), it's not really a big deal if the
Indian government has them too. The global tracking of populations ship has
already sailed. India's just getting on the bandwagon as far as that is
concerned.

~~~
intended
Wait, so a PAN card, A ration card, license, passport, voters ID card are
insufficient options?.

I know someone personally who got her passport soon after marrying, moving to
her in laws place and having no voters id, valid passport, or any other proof
of residence.

It was done logically, by showIng that she was married. The person she was
married to lived at x location. And finally that x location was the residence
of her in laws.

Further the requirements for address proof are governmental clauses. Those
will never go away, even with a UID.

And this is the same govt that ensures people sign their names and provide
photo ID every time you use a cyber cafe, and every time you visit a hotel.

The same people who said that a UID wouldn't. E compulsory to avail of govt
services. Then made it compulsory if you want to get gas.

Meta: I've followed this topic since inception, years ago. Since then I've
found that the defenders of this service are uniform in their thinking, they
all believe that the benefits are invaluable and the costs overplayed or
irrelevant in the face of the gains.

Edit: just because other people are doing it isn't good enough a reason to
follow suit

~~~
ashray
I think you missed a point there. Maybe your perspective is one of having a
fixed residence for all of your life. Unfortunately, my life didn't progress
that way and every time I move to a new place I have to go through the same
rigmarole all over again.

I can assure you that I'm not alone in this. I don't see why a UID can't pave
the way for further changes in government clauses.

Furthermore, I know of quite a few other countries where their ID cards help
them do tons of things that in India are neigh impossible without further
documentation.

As for cyber cafes and hotels requiring IDs - hotels everywhere require IDs
for the most part and the cyber cafe bullshit is because of idiotic govt.
representatives not understanding the whole terrorism through email
communications bit.

I find it quite ridiculous that India doesn't have any sort of unified ID
system so far. I've been traveling for the past one year and have been through
several countries, almost all of which have their respective ID systems. These
IDs help them open bank accounts, get credit cards, cross borders, and do much
more.

There is certainly a need for it in India.

~~~
intended
Well that's optimism, and it is naive. The govt clauses for residence proof
are ostensibly to track Terror. To know where a user of a suspected phone
number lives, or who used which cyber cafe.

Further you are in a minority, but your needs are servable. Further your needs
and requirements are completely and utterly contravening the original purpose
the system was sold under.

The original was supposed to be to help the poor avail of public services.

Your use cases are all servable by the private sector. Hardly the reason for
yet another ID system.

Especially when your primary aim of not having recursive paper work is un
touched. So how is this better?

~~~
ashray
How exactly are getting public healthcare, education, or crossing borders
servable by the private sector ? Replacing multiple authentication vectors
(voters ID, driving license, etc.) by a single acceptable ID is certainly a
step towards simplicity that I welcome.

All the IDs that you mentioned in your initial reply are useless or
unavailable in many cases.

PAN - non tax payers don't have them

Driving License - people who don't drive don't have them

Ration card - people who don't take ration don't have them

Passport - people who don't travel dont have them

Voters ID - people who don't live in the jurisdiction of their permanent
residences don't have them

I don't see how you drew the conclusion that I am in a minority with small
numbers. With 1.2 billion people there are plenty of Indians living and
working across state borders, etc. All of the defense/government employees to
start with..

~~~
intended
Hey hey, its your posts which started with talking about how life was tough to
get a bank account for example.

> " to be able to open a bank account/do other administrative shit with just
> one ID card."

Where did getting public healthcare, education or crossing borders come up?
For those I would point out other known failings. Come now, that's nearly a
bait and switch.

In your second response you say:

" Maybe your perspective is one of having a fixed residence for all of your
life. Unfortunately, my life didn't progress that way and every time I move to
a new place I have to go through the same rigmarole all over again."

So perhaps if you aren't referring to bank accounts you may mean education
which you refer to. Thats possible with a transfer certificate and
transcripts, and at most, a birth certificate. Having personally navigated one
of the worst possible categories of transfers into the Indian education
system, I can say that Identity, was never an issue. Sloth, confounding rules,
paperwork were greater transgressors.

Now regards your other points. Having several family members in defense, and
the government ID is not an issue for them. As far as I know the Def. forces
have their own ways of ensuring proof of residence. I can try and check up to
confirm if need be.

Regarding the list of ID systems you provided.

PAN: Non tax payers dont have them. But Tax payers do. And given the recent
conversions in Tax policy, thats a larger portion of the population. But that
still ignroes -

Ration Card: This is extremely common. From discussions with hired help on
their situation, they are nearly religious in the way they value the card and
make sure they have one. And for a more universal measure of its prevalence,
do note that its one of the first and most common things given to people to
regularize slums and shanties. So for the worse off sections of society its
extremely prevalent.

And if THAT doesn't work: There are Voter ID cards which fill the void for
people who don't travel.

\-----------------------

These are issues which are not tech issues, but in reality are people
problems. We can never remove the need for discipline, civic sense, and
standards in service delivery.

Other countries have managed without retina scanners, or finger print IDs of
all their citizens. Saying that we are a special case where we need tech to
solve our problems is a red herring. Its also a rejection of responsibility
and the burden we must carry. There is no quick fix for this.

There is also a major reason why all those countries which did conceive of
using a UID system like ours, balked and fled.

If having the finger prints of every citizen doesn't bother you, then we
really can't see eye to eye.

\-----------------------

It seems you are mostly troubled by the paper work, in particular, for proof
of residence.

That's not something the UID system will ever solve. The Govt has no intention
of ever rolling back those clauses. The political calculus and players are
harshly inimical at worst to the idea, and couldn't care less if they tried,
at best.

UID or not, you will always need to provide proof that you live there.

The only thing the UID will do is become an umbrella number which will help
track where you stay, which Cafe's you use and when, what your taxes are and
more. All in the name of helping people suffering from middle men and not
being able to get their ration.

There is already constant feature creep - the ideal behind this was a way to
help the poorer of us get access to resources and help, without the middle
man. It is written in its founding document that no services will be denied
due to lack of a UID.

Recently the MP govt. stated that a UID card is compulsory to avail of piped
gas. You have good reason to trust your govt. I assume.

The convenience perhaps.

~~~
ashray
Well my response wasn't really a blog post about why I want the UID system. It
was simply an example of where it might be useful. I don't see how that's a
bait and switch, it seems like you're more concerned about what I didn't say
than what I did say in my post.

I come from a defense background, so lets just put that issue to rest right
there. Are you bothered that I didn't say that in my first/second/third post
either ?

It looks like you are plainly against the UID system, maybe that's coming out
of your frustration of needing one for a gas pipeline, or maybe it's borne out
of something else.

I acknowledge all your points about how the UID won't help in many situations.
But the one thing it surely will enable is simplicity of documentation, and
like I said before, I certainly welcome that.

There is a definite problem in India with 'proving who you say you are' - I
hope the UID system will solve that to a certain extent.

What countries are you talking about ? Brazil, Chile, UAE, countries in the
European Union, Mexico, Peru, Ecuador, etc. all have UID systems in place.
These tie in their ID, tax info, etc. into a single card. I've seen first hand
how their IDs help them go through life and get out of the documentation hell
that we suffer from in India.

In every response you are suggesting alternatives (hey, I could give my
driving license for that, or there I could give my ration card, or wait in
that other place they might accept my voter ID) to a UID system. The idea of
documentation simplification is that you need just one ID for all of those
things. (education, health, banks, etc.) Not only is it easier for the person
presenting the ID, but it reduces the back end processing required for the
service provider. When we talk of numbers as large as 1 billion, those
inefficiencies stack up pretty quick.

You can go on talking about the failings of each scenario but the fact is that
many Indians have no IDs (my grandfather didn't have any legit ID until he was
92, when we applied for a passport for him to go to Egypt). Maybe your
domestic help have ration cards but please don't project your limited
experience onto everyone else, that hardly makes for a valid argument.

Not to mention the authenticity of people's ration cards, voter's IDs, driving
licenses, birth certificates, transcripts, transfer certificates, etc. That's
a whole can of worms in itself.

It appears that you're afraid that our government will bungle up the whole
initiative. Well, that of course is common in India and a risk with almost any
initiative. Still, that's not a reason to not take initiatives in the first
place.

------
JumpCrisscross
The Indian biometric project is not unique in its aims nor scope to uniquely
identify its population, simply the technology used to generate an ID.

In the U.S. we have SSNs (social security numbers) and driver's licences.
India is rolling out a 21st century answer to the problem of uniquely
identifying its population with technology to minimise the probability of
false, duplicate, or un-recoverable identities being created.

The technology gives the Indian government the ability to "track" its citizens
no further than the American government can "track" hers through their SSN-
linked bank accounts, cell phones, and government office activity. In a nut
shell, the technology hashes an individual's iris and fingerprints into an ID,
allowing for the ID to be easily verified in a de-centralised manner. In
contrast, verifying a U.S. ID requires patching in to a centralised database.

Can an iris scan and fingerprint be faked? Of course. But I'm not sure who's
arguing for the security of U.S. identity cards given that a stroll through
Greenwich Village will afford me multiple solicitations for fake IDs.

Ignore even the problems of having a democracy where you don't know who your
citizens are nor if nor how many times they've voted and think about how
difficult it would be for an individual with no verifiable identity to enter
into a long-term contract. Would you give him a mortgage? Or a loan to plant
his fields? Knowing well that if he doesn't feel like paying you back he can
change the name he goes by and you won't know the wiser? On the other side, if
you're a government official who knows nobody knows how many people are in
your district, wouldn't you feel less comfortable embezzling funds from
intended recipients if they had a way of proving they never received their
handout?

~~~
stfu
Am I the only one who is wondering how this comment ended up on top of this
discussion?

The argument seems highly problematic. How far is a government allowed to go
"to minimise the probability of false, duplicate, or un-recoverable
identities". Let us pretend for a moment, that these are indeed core issues,
that justify a billion dollar project.

If a government is allowed to intrude personal freedom just because the
technology is there, why don't we make caring a gps tracking device mandatory
for everyone leaving their registered residence. I mean, it is keeping the
streets save, right? What gives a government the right to demand from someone
fingerprints and iris scans, but not demand the GPS tracking or mandatory DNA
samples of every citizen.

If we go on and just lament that this is just how it is and government has to
keep the streets clean, these steps are consequential. After all a few decades
ago nobody cared about fingerprints, and it was purely some crime-fighting
technique. And so are DNA samples and monitoring anklets today.

U.S.'s tracing abilities given in the example based bank accounts or cell
phones are voluntary, i.e. I can take a bag of cash and a throw away phone and
government agencies would have to put substantial manpower into keeping track
of my actions. With the iris scan, all they need to do is have a high
resolution camera installed at the front of the store and they know where I
spend that money.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
_"just because the technology is there"_

The Indian government isn't collecting biometrics for fun. Every government,
particularly democracies and those with social spending, need to know (a) who
is in their country, and, (b) said individuals can reliably prove their
identity. Instead of filing forms and pictures in a centralised database the
Indian government has opted to generate unique IDs hashed from biometrics.

 _"What gives a government the right to demand from someone fingerprints and
iris scans, but not demand the GPS tracking or mandatory DNA samples of every
citizen."_

Slippery slope fallacy. By this logic any potential for data collection is
totalitarian. Note that to gain U.S. residency (or, for that matter, work at a
U.S. financial institution) I had to give my fingerprints to the FBI.

 _"With the iris scan, all they need to do is have a high resolution camera"_

Facial recognition technology would be easier, cheaper, and as technologically
inaccessible as planting high resolution cameras looking at peoples' irises
everywhere.

~~~
dalke
"reliably prove their identity"

What is the relationship between the level of reliability and the ability to
provide democratic government and social support? Obviously democracy does not
demand 100% reliable identification, if only because many countries with
governments based on democratic principles do not require 100% reliable proof
of identify in order to vote, participate in government, etc.

(Nor am I suggesting that you think it's 100% - this is a rhetorical point
only.)

Historically, the case of Clarence Henry Willcock in the UK is relevant. The
National Registration Act 1939 re-introduced compulsory identification cards.
The practice extended after the war ended. In 1950, Willcock refused to
present his card, saying "I am a Liberal and I am against this sort of thing".
While the courts upheld the decision and fine, public opinion was against that
level of identity checking, and the policy was scrapped in 1952. In part too
because of the cost.

So we have the case of a democratic system, with social care programs, which
seemingly decreased their ability to identify people reliably.

Denmark is another example of a country, widely accepted as having both a
democratic system and high social services, which doesn't have a highly
reliable identity system.

So it does not seem that what you are saying is essentially true, and it is
possible for a democratic government to have high social support systems
without having a reliable method to prove their identity - at least, no more
reliable than we had 100 years ago.

~~~
jhatax
Reliably proving your identity becomes very important in India due to the
vastness of the population and the number of subsidies earmarked for the
under-privileged. Subsidies aside, reliably identifying someone guarantees
their right to suffrage. Umpteen columns of newsprint are devoted each
election year to voter fraud - people go to their designated election office
to cast their vote but are turned away because they have "already voted".
Having a reliable way to identify an individual will reduce the occurrence of
these activities, if not totally eliminate them.

I have railed about the corruption in India in earlier posts and comments.
That the government has green-lighted a project that leverages India's
strength in IT to actually help its citizens is a departure from the norm, and
is worth lauding. It remains to be seen if this will actually be implemented
once the current government's term runs out.

~~~
dalke
I was speaking to the broad generalization of JumpCrisscross who said that
"Every government" needs to do this, for the sake of good democracy and social
services. I disputed that broad generalization. Nothing I wrote should be
construed to apply specifically for or against India.

As to voter fraud, of that I know only about the US. There is a handful of
voter fraud in the US, and almost no in-person voter fraud at all[1]. What
fraud there is is mostly via the absentee ballot. We had a long history of
election fraud and vote rigging in the US, but little of that was due to the
inability to reliably prove one's identity.

([1] When you vote, you sign your name to a registry, which is publicly
reviewable. This biometric identifier is sufficient to detect, after the fact,
if there is significant in-person fraud. This has not been demonstrated,
despite a strong desire by some to show that it exists.)

------
jackfoxy
Didn't even make it through the fist paragraph before I hit this gem

 _A small group of entrepreneurs within the government..._

IMO says a lot about the biases of the reporter and probably the site as well.
Franklin may be frequently misquoted (as pointed out by another commenter
here), but the liberty/security trade-off is real. Personally I tend to err on
the side of liberty idealism. It's clear there are plenty of interests pulling
for the other side.

~~~
smokeyj
So many gems in this one.

> One area in desperate need of disruption is the delivery of government
> services.

Seeing disruptive describe a bureaucratic process is tickling.

> Over time, systematic corruption and mismanagement have bred bad data, false
> information and outright fraud ... Poor laborers and migrant workers, in
> particular, are forced to travel far from their homes to collect their wages
> and benefits, having to dole out bribes to predatory middlemen along the
> way.

So now we're empowering a corrupt monopoly with biometric intelligence on
every citizen in the country. What could possibly go wrong..

~~~
neurotech1
This gets dangerously close to Minority Report [
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)> ] type scenario where
political dissidents or a minority group, can be denied all services by a
corrupt official.

Fingerprint scanners can be defeated by a determined person. Retinal scanners
will probably be defeated in the next 5-10 years. The government will claim
"The retinal scanner authentication database is never wrong" until they are
proven wrong.

~~~
ktizo
_Retinal scanners will probably be defeated in the next 5-10 years._

I thought about this and wondered if you could make a hologram of the inverse
of your retina, combined with the retina you want to have, on a contact lens.

~~~
neurotech1
That is what I was thinking. A contact lens with the right reflective hologram
to look like a retina. Most retina scanners don't have insanely high
resolution (usually less than 1 Megapixel)

------
patrickgzill
This will allow massive credit expansion in India, as being trackable means
lending companies can more easily identify people. Same thing has happened in
the Philippines over the last 10 years, easy credit has exploded.

~~~
mindslight
And this is a good development? Institutionalized credit is merely a market-
based mechanism for the gradual erosion of freedom. It brings economic gain in
the short term, as people are able to step outside the prejudices restricting
their informal local credit. However for the long term, just take a look at
the debt treadmill most everyone in the US is on.

(idk why you're being downvoted; you're correct)

~~~
sgt
I'm not sure whether OP thinks this is a good thing or not, but I certainly
hope not. Being universally trackable by government is one of the most evil
things I can think of right now. Once this starts, we know what's coming in a
few years - an RFID in every person (or similar, possibly more advanced
technology). Say goodbye to individual freedom.

------
nmridul
Let me tell you what it is trying to solve.

If I'm a poor and illiterate in India, I neither know what special programs or
subsidies the government has for me (I'm illiterate and the news does not
reach me).

The middle men already has forged my identities and the amount that the
Government sent me is already shared by them in the middle.

This is what the government is trying to solve. To make sure that what is
being sent is received by the correct person.

It may not solve it entirely. But at the very least it will make it difficult
for the middle men to forge the identities now. Or at the worst case, the
middle men will have to share a portion of what they receive with the end user
(the poor me).

When you look at it from a first world perspective, then your freedom and
government control seems to be the main concern.

But when you have had no food for the last week and you don't have your own
house and have no way to feed your family, then the freedom to shout against
my government is my last priority.

~~~
intended
But that's not what it's being used for. UID compulsory for gas? UID being
used for all sorts Of things other than assistance to the poor.

UID data being compromised already - first hand account in this thread.

Constant feature creep. Every single person who has such positive hopes needs
to take a good long look at its real implementation, it's reall failings and
it's drawbacks. Without looking at potential possible positives.

~~~
nmridul
Cooking gas is heavily subsidized in India. Maybe not many poor are able to
afford it, but still the lower middle class rely on this subsidized gas. And
this is one way the government can try to reduce the misuse. I'm not saying it
will completely remove the misuse. But any reduction is good for the society.

~~~
intended
All of these are cost/benefits. If the cost is giving extremely powerful
abilities to an entity which finds its best interests in playing communal
games to score points in its vote base, then the lesser of two evils is
corruption.

Any reduction is not good for society when it comes with huge costs.

------
joelrunyon
I realize this may be a very american perspective, but I can't imagine any
tradeoff that would make this "worth it" for me.

Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither. - Benjamin Franklin.

~~~
scdoshi
I can understand the liberty v/s security implications, but I don't understand
when people in the US feel they are better off in terms of liberty.

This is essentially SSN implemented in the 21st century. And you can't get a
job, buy/rent a house, or get a bank account without an SSN

The fact that you can be anonymous in the U.S. and still live a life inside of
regular society is a complete myth. And I think most people accept the fact
that the SSN is in fact necessary.

India does not have any such system, instead of the SSN, they have ten
different numbers attached to a person. All this does is make the ID part of
it uniform.

The biometric part is not the focus here, the ID part is, which pretty much
every developed country already has. The biometric part is just a means to get
the ID part done better.

Just to reiterate, I understand the liberty v/s security implications, but
americans have already given theirs up for security, so maybe that's just the
price to pay of being a developed nation.

~~~
Negitivefrags
I've actually noticed that citizens of the US need to provide their SSN in a
huge number of situations that I would never need to provide any kind of
government identification.

The closest thing we have to an ID that every citizen has is an IRD number for
the purposes of tax. You would give that to your bank and your employer so
that they can pay tax on your behalf, but even that is optional. If you don't
provide it then they will assume that you pay tax at the highest rate.

Compare to when I was staying a friends house in the US and heard him give his
SSN to the phone company when he was troubleshooting his internet. I find it
baffling that you would need a government issued ID number just to form a
relationship with a phone company.

------
anuraj
Given India's track record on surveillance, this can become a security
nightmare for its populace. The chances of this data being misused by various
detrimental interests are very real and is already happening. India need to be
much more open and populace needs to be more educated before biometric
identification can achieve positive outcome.

------
kindahero
one example for how far our people can go with corruption., few days back the
officials came to our village to issue these cards., they issued two cards for
each (one for one hand, five finger prints are needed for one card) to claim
the commission from government.

~~~
intended
Wow. Govt chaps or outsourcers? Mind giving the village name? It would be
useful if it could be converted into an rti request, or just simply for
detailed knowledge on the types of scams one can expect.

------
shell0x
What are the advantages of using this system over a normal passport? It seems
like just another country trying to get a good reputation as a surveillance
state :(

------
binarymax
A fascinating article was in the New Yorker about this here:
[http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/03/111003fa_fact_...](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/03/111003fa_fact_parker)
(sorry it's behind a paywall).

To the naysayers, it's a very bold move to empower impoverished and give them
the ability to claim benefits...and not some anti freedom push. In any case
I'm not living in India so I can't really comment, but again the situation is
very interesting.

------
pycassa
good.. if they start planning now.. we, indians would get these at the end of
this decade...

------
nacker
"it can also be used to offer hundreds of millions their greatest chance at
inclusion and a prosperous life."

This would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic.

The banks are SO well known for their unselfish altruism. After all, they have
pretty much raped the first world, and indebted generations to come. How lucky
the Indian masses are, to be the latest objects of their, uh, generosity ?

