
A schoolgirl arriving for class presses her thumb against a fingerprint scanner, verifying her presence. Since April, this has been the scene at a handful of schools in the state of Jharkhand in eastern India. There, the attendance of students and teachers has been tracked using biometrics that are linked with Indiaâs huge national database, Aadhaar. It is the worldâs largest biometrics database, but now it is under threat.
Started in 2009, holds the fingerprints, iris and facial scans of 600 million Indians. Besides school attendance, the database is used to provide natural gas subsidies to Indiaâs rural poor, and to send wages directly to peopleâs bank accounts. It is a way of providing identification to people who may not even have a birth certificate, and has been trumpeted by the national government as a way to stamp out fraud.
Aadhaar was the flagship programme of Indiaâs Congress Party, which lost to Narendra Modiâs Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on 16 May in the countryâs general elections (see âA social electionâ). The BJP slammed Aadhaar in the run up to the election, calling it a failure and a waste of money. âTheyâve been speaking out against it publicly,â says Reetika Khera, an economist at the Indian Institute of Technology in Delhi. âTheyâve been trashing it.â
Advertisement
India isnât the only developing country with a national biometrics programme. There are more than 1 billion people enrolled in biometrics schemes across the developing world. Governments claim the systems are filling an âidentification gapâ left by a lack of official documentation, such as birth certificates, that citizens of rich countries take for granted.
Power imbalance
Privacy advocates see such systems as causing a power imbalance between governments and citizens. In 2012, the Electronic Frontier Foundation criticised for âopening the door to widespread privacy violationsâ.
Aadhaarâs greatest promise was to reduce fraudulent claims of government welfare payments, says Khera. It aimed to cut corrupt middlemen out of Indiaâs right to work scheme, through which all residents are guaranteed 100 daysâ work a year, paid at minimum wage.
âIn the old system someone would work 20 days, but the person at the work site who marks attendance would add another zero and make it look like theyâve worked 200 days,â says Khera. âA higher official would make the payment and theyâd share the booty, then heâd give a person 20 daysâ pay and make them sign for the whole 200.â
Direct payments to bank accounts associated with Aadhaar do indeed fix the immediate problem of fraud, by preventing fraudsters from stealing someoneâs identity and setting up false accounts in their name. Without biometrics, âI donât even know that the bad guys are withdrawing my moneyâ, Khera says. âNow you need my fingerprint to authenticate.â
Weakest link
But it hasnât worked out as planned, because new problems have sprung up. Corrupt administrators who inflate work claims can simply coerce a worker to withdraw the fraudulent payments from their account, or invite the worker to join them in the scheme.
Malavika Jayaram, a privacy researcher at Harvard University, says Aadhaar makes people who are vulnerable take responsibility for preventing fraud.
âYou are shifting the burden of responsibility onto the person who is weakest in the chain, expecting the least sophisticated in the system to make sound technical decisions about when to use biometrics,â she says. âItâs insane.â
There are other problems with relying on biometrics to deliver vital services. Peopleâs faces and irises change as they age, and some 15 per cent of people in India have had their fingerprints rubbed off through manual labor. As a result, the Unique Identity Authority (UID) of India, which runs Aadhaar, wants data to be entered into the database at birth, but then have people update their biometrics once they are older. This gives them an opportunity to create a fake identity.
âThere are kids who have gone and registered three or four times,â says Jayaram, adding that people have managed to get their dogsâ faces, rather than their own, registered in the database, or pictures of zombies. These are just spoofs, but they show that the system is vulnerable to fakes that could be used fraudulently.
Supreme ruling
And if someone breaks into Aadhaar and steals biometric data, itâs very hard to correct. âWith other security systems, if someone gets your password you can change it,â says Khera. But you canât make a quick change to your irises or fingerprints.
The Indian Supreme Court has taken a stand against Aadhaar too. In February, the court ruled that the government cannot make it compulsory to join the biometric database in order to use a government service. Aadhaar has always been advertised as a voluntary database, but the ruling took the wind out of the UIDâs sails, says Khera.
Jayaram is conflicted. In a country with no data protection laws, she says such a pervasive government-run system does not serve the people. Yet it could, if legislation were passed that guards the privacy of the citizens Aadhaar was designed to serve. âTwo years ago I would have said I just want the project to die,â she says. âNow I say, âHow can we make it better?'â
A social election
Narendra Modiâs Bharatiya Janata Party won a historic victory last week. The planetâs largest democracy cast 528 million votes, sweeping him to victory over the incumbent Congress Party by the largest margin in an Indian election since 1984.
Some 243 million Indians now have access to the internet, and with tens of millions of them on Facebook and Twitter, the candidates made heavy use of social media.
Modi is known for his active online presence â he has more than 4 million followers on Twitter, and in November 2012 he gave a speech concurrently in 26 locations across India .
This article will appear in print under the headline âThe eyes have itâ