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

Monday, April 2, 2018

13169 - UIDAI database defective in targeting subsidies and benefits - Sunday Guardian

UIDAI database defective in targeting subsidies and benefits

Anupam Saraph
  • Updated
  • March 31, 2018,
  • 5:10 PM

People show their fingers marked with phosphorus ink along with their Aadhar cards after casting their votes for the Bawana Assembly constituency bypoll in New Delhi on 23 August, 2017. IANS

Can a non unique ID that doesn’t certify anything, or does not know how it was created, that was never audited and never identifies, deliver benefits and subsidies without exclusion, leakages, and tragedy?

AUTHENTICATION IS NOT IDENTIFICATION
Identification requires that the transacting parties are responsible to establish each other’s identity. This reduces risk of fraud and, in the event of misidentification, places legal liability with the party that failed in its responsibility to identify the other. It’s unlikely that you will deposit money with someone who visits your home and claims to be your banker. It’s unlikely that your banker will allow anyone to withdraw money from your account without identifying them.
In authentication anyone with the key to open the lock can undertake transactions. If the individual visiting your house asks you to enter an OTP received on your phone to complete a transaction initiated by her, no identification ever took place but the transaction was authenticated by the OTP. If it turns out the person was an imposter, your bank has no legal liability. Similarly, if your banker allowed anyone in possession of your phone or biometric to authenticate with the OTP or biometric, no identification happened. Again, no one has legal liability.
Authentication is merely like opening the lock if you have the correct key. It does not imply who you are, your rights or your authorisation to transact anything behind the lock you opened with the key. Identification, on the other hand, requires the transacting party to establish your identity and right and face legal consequences for failure to identify you correctly.
If the authentication is done by an ecosystem of third parties that have nothing to do with your transactions, the relationship of the transacting parties is colonised, corrupted and destroyed as responsibility for the transaction rests with no one any longer.
Delivery of subsidies and benefits requires identification of the beneficiaries. The UIDAI does not identify anyone. The Aadhaar cannot identify anyone. In fact the Aadhaar (Targeted delivery of Benefits and Subsidies) Act doesn’t even define identification.
AADHAAR IS NOT UNIQUE
In order to prevent leakage of benefits and subsidies to ghost beneficiaries, the list of beneficiaries has to ensure there are no ghosts or duplicates. The UIDAI has been making the claim of Aadhaar being a unique ID. However, when asked, in an RTI query, to indicate the number of unique names and biometrics in its database, the UIDAI has no information. Furthermore, the UIDAI also indicates that they cannot retrieve a unique record using biometrics.
The UIDAI also has no idea about the documents of proof of identity or address used to issue the Aadhaar number. It is unable to say how many of these documents were used multiple times to issue an Aadhaar number.
This not only means that the Aadhaar database does not have unique records, but also that it has no advantage over existing databases. The Aadhaar database has no basis to claim that it is free of ghosts and duplicates or that it can rid other databases of ghosts or duplicates.
In order to ensure that the demographic or biometric information associated with the Aadhaar and used for authentication is genuine, it needs to be certified by the issuer. When asked which officers are assigned the role to certify the demographic and biometric information associated with the Aadhar number, the UIDAI replied that no such role exists with the UIDAI.
The UIDAI further indicated that the database has never been verified or audited. It is evident that there is no basis to claim that the use of Aadhaar numbers is able to target subsidies and benefits to unique individuals and eliminate leakages to duplicates or ghosts.
TARGETED DELIVERY
How many unique households are targeted by the government for subsidy and benefits? The UIDAI cannot tell how many unique addresses exist in its database. It cannot tell the multiple person households, by counting the number of non-unique addresses in its database, exist either.
The mobile authentication for delivery of targeted benefits and subsidies as well as the protection and updation of data associated with the Aadhaar number assumes that each person with an Aadhaar number has an email and mobile number. The UIDAI has never tested out this design assumption by simply querying its database for the number of unique email IDs or mobile numbers in its database. Equally, it has no clue about the number of shared mobile numbers or email IDs.
Any delivery of benefits and subsidies requiring mobile authentication or email and mobile alerts cannot reach out to those who are not in possession of a unique mobile or email. Clearly, JAM numbers—Jandhan, Aadhaar and mobile numbers—to undertake Direct Benefit Transfers through Aadhaar payment systems cannot guarantee money transfers to real, unique beneficiaries like the RBI’s NEFT could.
Identification cannot be replaced with authentication in the delivery of subsidies. A database that is not unique, has not been certified, verified or audited, has no traceable basis, and which is run by private players in the ecosystem of Aadhaar, cannot be replaced by government databases and machinery mandated under various laws to target and deliver benefits and subsidies.
Furthermore, the UIDAI, that takes no responsibility for the use or users of Aadhaar, cannot replace the individual departments and ministries that have to deliver the benefits and services. The UIDAI has no skin-in-the-game to guarantee that no one will be excluded, no one’s dignity, justice, liberty or equality would be destroyed to claim benefits. Private parties who run the Aadhaar ecosystem cannot be allowed to be sovereign to deliver benefits and subsidies to unknown, uncertified, unverified and unaudited beneficiaries if Aadhaar were to be used under Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act. It is evident that there is no basis for the claim that the Aadhaar is required for the targeted delivery of benefits and subsidies.


Dr Anupam Saraph is an expert in governance of complex systems and advises governments and businesses across the world. He can be reached @anupamsaraph.
CLICK ON TITLE TO SEE ORIGINAL ARTICLE - Posted by
Labels: