In 2009, I became extremely concerned with the concept of Unique Identity for various reasons. Connected with many like minded highly educated people who were all concerned.
On 18th May 2010, I started this Blog to capture anything and everything I came across on the topic. This blog with its million hits is a testament to my concerns about loss of privacy and fear of the ID being misused and possible Criminal activities it could lead to.
In 2017 the Supreme Court of India gave its verdict after one of the longest hearings on any issue. I did my bit and appealed to the Supreme Court Judges too through an On Line Petition.
In 2019 the Aadhaar Legislation has been revised and passed by the two houses of the Parliament of India making it Legal. I am no Legal Eagle so my Opinion carries no weight except with people opposed to the very concept.
In 2019, this Blog now just captures on a Daily Basis list of Articles Published on anything to do with Aadhaar as obtained from Daily Google Searches and nothing more. Cannot burn the midnight candle any longer.
"In Matters of Conscience, the Law of Majority has no place"- Mahatma Gandhi
Ram Krishnaswamy
Sydney, Australia.

Aadhaar

The UIDAI has taken two successive governments in India and the entire world for a ride. It identifies nothing. It is not unique. The entire UID data has never been verified and audited. The UID cannot be used for governance, financial databases or anything. It’s use is the biggest threat to national security since independence. – Anupam Saraph 2018

When I opposed Aadhaar in 2010 , I was called a BJP stooge. In 2016 I am still opposing Aadhaar for the same reasons and I am told I am a Congress die hard. No one wants to see why I oppose Aadhaar as it is too difficult. Plus Aadhaar is FREE so why not get one ? Ram Krishnaswamy

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.-Mahatma Gandhi

In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.Mahatma Gandhi

“The invasion of privacy is of no consequence because privacy is not a fundamental right and has no meaning under Article 21. The right to privacy is not a guaranteed under the constitution, because privacy is not a fundamental right.” Article 21 of the Indian constitution refers to the right to life and liberty -Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi

“There is merit in the complaints. You are unwittingly allowing snooping, harassment and commercial exploitation. The information about an individual obtained by the UIDAI while issuing an Aadhaar card shall not be used for any other purpose, save as above, except as may be directed by a court for the purpose of criminal investigation.”-A three judge bench headed by Justice J Chelameswar said in an interim order.

Legal scholar Usha Ramanathan describes UID as an inverse of sunshine laws like the Right to Information. While the RTI makes the state transparent to the citizen, the UID does the inverse: it makes the citizen transparent to the state, she says.

Good idea gone bad
I have written earlier that UID/Aadhaar was a poorly designed, unreliable and expensive solution to the really good idea of providing national identification for over a billion Indians. My petition contends that UID in its current form violates the right to privacy of a citizen, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. This is because sensitive biometric and demographic information of citizens are with enrolment agencies, registrars and sub-registrars who have no legal liability for any misuse of this data. This petition has opened up the larger discussion on privacy rights for Indians. The current Article 21 interpretation by the Supreme Court was done decades ago, before the advent of internet and today’s technology and all the new privacy challenges that have arisen as a consequence.

Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP Rajya Sabha

“What is Aadhaar? There is enormous confusion. That Aadhaar will identify people who are entitled for subsidy. No. Aadhaar doesn’t determine who is eligible and who isn’t,” Jairam Ramesh

But Aadhaar has been mythologised during the previous government by its creators into some technology super force that will transform governance in a miraculous manner. I even read an article recently that compared Aadhaar to some revolution and quoted a 1930s historian, Will Durant.Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Rajya Sabha MP

“I know you will say that it is not mandatory. But, it is compulsorily mandatorily voluntary,” Jairam Ramesh, Rajya Saba April 2017.

August 24, 2017: The nine-judge Constitution Bench rules that right to privacy is “intrinsic to life and liberty”and is inherently protected under the various fundamental freedoms enshrined under Part III of the Indian Constitution

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the World; indeed it's the only thing that ever has"

“Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.” -Edward Snowden

In the Supreme Court, Meenakshi Arora, one of the senior counsel in the case, compared it to living under a general, perpetual, nation-wide criminal warrant.

Had never thought of it that way, but living in the Aadhaar universe is like living in a prison. All of us are treated like criminals with barely any rights or recourse and gatekeepers have absolute power on you and your life.

Announcing the launch of the # BreakAadhaarChainscampaign, culminating with events in multiple cities on 12th Jan. This is the last opportunity to make your voice heard before the Supreme Court hearings start on 17th Jan 2018. In collaboration with @no2uidand@rozi_roti.

UIDAI's security seems to be founded on four time tested pillars of security idiocy

1) Denial

2) Issue fiats and point finger

3) Shoot messenger

4) Bury head in sand.

God Save India

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

10545 - Yahoo!: A cautionary tale

POLICY WATCH COLUMNS
Yahoo!: A cautionary tale
OCTOBER 19, 2016 00:37 IST

No Indian citizen can, or should, trust a story in which Aadhaar data security is never breached

On September 22, Yahoo! announced that the personal data of half a billion users had been stolen in 2014. The theft of data was attributed to “state-sponsored” hackers, which some informed sources in California and Washington, D.C. said meant the Chinese secret service. Subsequently, claims emerged about a cracker selling personal information of Yahoo! account users on the dark Web.

The company’s failure to discover or report the loss for two years will raise enormous problems for its embattled chief executive, Marissa Mayer, not to mention its covert participation in the surveillance of the incoming emails of its users. But it will be even more costly for the U.S. telecom giant, Verizon, which agreed to pay a bargain basement amount of $4.8 billion for the company in July. In the U.S., class action litigation for consumers’ damages from the loss of their private information (including mobile phone numbers, passwords, and addresses) is inevitable, and will be costly: Yahoo! may ultimately owe the people harmed by this theft far more than Verizon was willing to pay for it.

Making Aadhaar mandatory

But this is not just a story from afar for Indian citizens following the controversy about the onset of Aadhaar. Despite a crystal clear prohibition issued by the Supreme Court against making Aadhaar registration mandatory, the Indian government and enthusiastic parties in both State governments and industry have proceeded to adopt Aadhaar-based technology and impose requirements for Aadhaar registration for social services and benefits — from educational scholarships to booking railway tickets.

Investigations have revealed that dozens of Aadhaar requirements are in tension with the Supreme Court’s order. Contempt petitions brought against agencies for flouting the order will soon be heard by the Supreme Court. When the judges hear those petitions, they should be keeping Yahoo! in their thoughts.

The Yahoo! breach made news around the world primarily because of its scale: it’s really hard to lose the data on 500 million people. But not for Aadhaar. When completed, Aadhaar’s database will cover the world’s second largest population. If (or when) the database is compromised, it will not be possible for people to change their passwords. Biometric data is essentially unchangeable. Whether the retinal data currently stored, or the entire human genomes that may eventually be stored there, a breach in the Aadhaar data store will disperse information crucially identifying each Indian and that cannot be modified in response to the loss.

So, if Aadhaar is breached, what is the plan for the morning after the breach? Despite all the puffery, and all the claims of social subsidies immune to corruption and payments systems offering convenience to the unbanked millions, no one has so far intimated how Aadhaar’s proponents suggest we manage the obvious risk that stares us all in the face if Aadhaar registration becomes mandatory for most social purposes.

No perfect security

The plan cannot be for perfect security, operating flawlessly forever, for Aadhaar. No government can at present promise perfect security for even its most critical personnel data. No “platform” company, with all the immense profits earned from processing the data of hundreds of millions of customers, can claim to guarantee perfect security of customer data. No Indian citizen can, or should, trust a story in which Aadhaar data security is never breached.

Until we can see that the government has a realistic plan to manage the risks involved in placing all Indians’ proof of identity in one big box, making Aadhaar registration mandatory means imposing on every Indian citizen an unmanaged, possibly unmanageable, risk of digital environment catastrophe. 

Imposing permanent damage on the entire society because entrepreneurs and civil servants were in a hurry, because they couldn’t wait for the sober second thoughts imposed by the rule of law, even for the best of modernising and reformist motives, is a price far too high to pay. And until there is national privacy legislation, with a real system for making parties pay damages when they injure individuals by losing their critical personal information, the courts may have no opportunity or power to deal with the consequences of poor planning and hasty public policy after the fact.

Only the Supreme Court’s clarity and willingness to back its order with enforcement ensure that law — rather than public relations and the optimistic talk of the start-up culture — stands between our society and the consequences of hubris.

So when the judges convene to hear argument on the Aadhaar motions, they should have that emphatic punctuation at the end of Yahoo! very firmly in mind.

Eben Moglen is Founding-Director of Software Freedom Law Center and professor of law and legal history at Columbia University. Mishi Choudhary is technology lawyer and Executive Director at SFLC.IN, a donor-supported legal services organisation.