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

Showing posts with label mass surveillance and ethnic cleansing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mass surveillance and ethnic cleansing. Show all posts

Monday, June 25, 2018

13711 - Privacy advocates seek stronger laws - The Hindu


NEW DELHI, JUNE 18, 2018 01:45 IST

A citizen advocacy group has put together a model Bill that focuses on user rights, data protection

The Cambridge Analytica scandal and the Aadhaar database security concerns have provoked a citizen advocacy group to launch a campaign to protect the privacy of individuals in India.
A set of lawyers and policy analysts have put together a model Bill — the Indian Privacy Code, 2018, — with an overriding effect over the Aadhaar Act. The initiative, backed by the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), is looking to garner public awareness and nudge the government into adopting a strong law focused on user rights.

The model Bill envisages a law that will prevent some of the fundamental features of the Aadhaar Act from allegedly operating against citizens. This, the advocacy group expects, will shift power from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to the people.

Advocate Apar Gupta, a co-founding member of IFF, said fundamental features of the Aadhaar Act make its use mandatory while being a universal digital ID not tied to a specific purpose.

Sensitive form of data
“It relies on biometrics, which are an incredibly sensitive form of data. It results in mass surveillance as precondition to availing essential services. Due to its architecture, it makes people vulnerable to data breach and identity theft,” Mr. Gupta said.
However, the model Bill seeks to allow people the option of knowing how much of their data are collected, what information is parted with and what are its consequences. More importantly, it will clearly demarcate an option for the people to refuse consent. This undercuts the Aadhaar Act but more importantly the administrative practices which have resulted in making it mandatory, Mr. Gupta said.

IFF members were also part of the ‘Save the Internet’ campaign that was instrumental in pushing back Facebook’s Free Basics in India.

The advocacy body said its latest campaign, ‘Save Our Privacy’, was to make sure that India gets a privacy and data protection law that protects the fundamental right to privacy.

Privacy law
There is no separate law in India on privacy and data protection. While many drafting efforts have been made since 2010, little has come out of it. In 2012, an Expert Group on Privacy, chaired by former Delhi High Court Chief Justice A.P. Shah, had submitted a report to the Planning Commission. The report had recommended passing a law that makes privacy safeguards technology-neutral and applicable to both government and private sectors.

During the Aadhaar hearing before the Supreme Court in mid-2017, the Centre had constituted a committee of experts under the chairmanship of former Supreme Court Justice B.N. Srikrishna. This committee had released a White Paper and is expected to recommend a draft law to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.

A nine-judge Bench of the apex court had last year declared privacy as intrinsic to life and liberty, and an inherent right protected under the Constitution. This means that an ordinary citizen can now directly approach the court in case of violation of his/ her privacy. The verdict armed the common man against unreasonable State intrusions and protected informational privacy in a digital age.

During the hearing, the top court had expressed apprehensions against the State passing on personal data collected from citizens to private players.

Privacy commission
The model Bill is built on seven progressive privacy principles, including use and purpose limitation (personal data collected for specified purposes cannot be further processed for other purposes) in collection and processing of data. It said a strong and independent privacy commission was necessary to ensure that data protection rights are enforced. The model Bill provides the privacy commission wide powers of investigation, adjudication, rule-making and enforcement.

The model Bill said the government, its arms, bodies and programmes should be made compliant with the privacy protection principles through a data protection law. “We support the use of digital technologies for public benefit. However, it should not be privileged over fundamental rights,” the advocacy group said.

Mass surveillance
“The government is responsible for delivery of many essential services to the public. These services must not be withheld from an individual due to such individual not sharing data with the government...Withholding services on the pretext of requirement of collection of data effectively amounts to extortion of consent. Individuals cannot be forced to trade away data and citizenship at the altar of being permitted to use government services and access legal entitlements on welfare,” the advocacy group said.

The group said the data protection law will have to limit mass surveillance as it contravenes the principles of necessity, proportionality and purpose limitation. It said that evidence gathered illegally, such as telephone intercepts without valid tapping orders, is inadmissible as proof in legal proceedings. To ensure further accountability, all such orders need to be communicated to the person who was surveilled.

Collection of data
The model Bill seeks to ensure that no government or private entity collects sensitive personal data without consent from an individual. The individual will have the right to obtain information from the data controller. This information will include purposes of storage and processing; categories of personal data; recipients to whom personal data have been or will be disclosed; the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority; and existence of automated decision-making.

More importantly, the individual will have a right to request erasure and destruction of data at any time, and data controllers and processors will have to comply with such requests within a fixed time frame.

Offences and penalties
The model Bill also seeks to provide punishment for those found illegally collecting, receiving, storing, processing, disclosing or otherwise handling any personal data. Punishment for this offence may include a fine of ₹1 crore and a three-year imprisonment. Even illegal surveillance of another person will be liable to a fine, which may extend to a fine of ₹10 crore and a five-year jail term.


The foundation has sent an e-mail to the Srikrishna Committee, with a copy of the model Bill. It said this was a policy fix for recurring concerns and controversies, including issues such as Aadhaar, Cambridge Analytica, the social media communication Hub and Edward Snowden’s revelations on mass surveillance.

Tuesday, December 12, 2017

12487 - Checks and balances needed for mass surveillance of citizens, say experts - The Hindu


BENGALURU , DECEMBER 09, 2017 20:00 IST


A number of measures are required to protect law-abiding citizens from mass surveillance and misuse of their personal data, according to top technology and legal experts.

The measures include issuing of tokens by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) instead of Aadhaar numbers and having an official in the judiciary give permission to vigilance.

The experts were participating in a panel discussion on ‘Navigating Big Data Challenges’ at Carnegie India’s Global Technology Summit here. They also said there was a need to implement ‘de-identification of data’ or preventing a person’s identity from being connected with information.

The moderator of the discussion was Justice B.N. Srikrishna, a former Supreme Court judge, who was also heading a government-appointed committee of experts to identify “key data protection issues” and recommend methods to address them. Justice Srikrishna told the panellists that Aadhaar or the unique identification number had empowered the people. But in situations where the State wants all the information about citizens from different service providers because of its suspicions related to terrorism or criminal activity, he asked, what is the method to create a balance?

“Surveillance is like salt in cooking which is essential in tiny quantities, but counterproductive even if slightly in excess,” responded Sunil Abraham, executive director of Bengaluru-based think tank, Centre for Internet and Society. He said there was a need to make a surveillance system which had privacy by design built into it.

Mr. Abraham said that his organisation had proposed to the UIDAI that it used ‘tokenisation,’ which meant that whenever there was a ‘know your customer’ requirement, the Aadhaar number was not accessed by organisations like telecom firms or the banks. Instead, when the citizens used various services via smart cards or pins, a token got generated, which was controlled by the UIDAI. Organisations like banks and telecom firms can store those token numbers in their database. He said this would make it harder for unauthorised parties to combine databases. But at the same time would enable law enforcement agencies to combine database using the appropriate authorizations and infrastructure.

“UIDAI is considering this, they call it the dummy Aadhaar numbers. We need technical as well as institutional checks and balances,” said Mr. Abraham.
Countries like the U.S also have processes like Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court) which entertains applications made by the U.S Government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and certain other forms of investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes.
“My concern is that in the current system, surveillance can be done by the State machinery. I don’t necessarily suggest FISA court.... but some kind of mechanism where (one can’t) be held at the mercy of incestuous State machinery,” said Rahul Matthan, a partner at law firm Trilegal. “But have some second person who is outside the influence of this system (and) who actually says ‘yes this is a terrorist which requires us to do mass surveillance,” he said.

Artificial Intelligence
A large amount of information or Big data ranging from financial, health to political insights of people is being collected by different organisations and service providers which is sitting in different silos. All of this is likely going to be linked through Aadhaar. Mr. Srikrishna asked what if a situation arises where all of this data is aggregated and using artificial intelligence and machine learning, one is able to analyse it and profile individuals. He said “would that be not a terrifying scenario” where the State can act super-monitor for citizens. He asked how can citizens be guarded against it?
Mr.Srikrishna was referring to the ‘Social Credit System’ proposed by the Chinese government for creating a national reputation system to rate the trustworthiness of its citizens including their economic and social status. It works as a mass surveillance tool and uses big data analysis technology.
“It is a possibility. What stands in the way of it becoming a reality (in India) is a robust law,” said Mr.Matthan. “Technology is so powerful that it could equally be used for good as well as bad.”

Sunday, May 7, 2017

11261 - Is India's Aadhaar System an Instrument For Surveillance? - Global Voices


Posted 5 May 2017 7:37 GMT 

Taking fingerprints for Aadhaar, photo via Wikimedia Commons, by Kannanshanmugham. CC BY 3.0

The first part of this report talked about the background and the security concerns with Aadhaar, the unique ID database of India, the largest of its kind in the world.

As questions emerge around flawed security measures being used to protect India's digital ID database, government authorities are defending the system — and even taking action against those who are revealing its flaws.

Developed by the Union government of India in 2009, the plan called for the creation a Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) that would issue Unique Identity numbers (UIDs) to all residents of India. Under this scheme, now known as Aadhaar (which means “foundation” or “base” in Hindi), the UID number ties together several pieces of a person's demographic and biometric information, including their photograph, ten fingerprints and an image of their iris. This information is all stored in a centralized database. According to the UIDAI, a UID is meant to be “robust enough to eliminate duplicate and fake identities, and can be verified and authenticated in an easy, cost-effective way.”

The scheme has so far enrolled 1.13 billion Indians and residents of India, making it the largest biometric database in the world.

In a 2016 report entitled Digital Dividends, the World Bank included “digital identity” among the four so-called digital enablers for development. With strong identification systems, the report's authors argue, it is possible to “deliver vital services to people, govern effectively, eliminate duplicative or inefficient programs, make efficient use of limited resources, and produce statistics accurately.”

But thus far, India's Aadhaar system has not achieved these aims and has in some cases increased obstacles for citizens seeking to take advantage of basic public services, such as food subsidies. The system also has not actually reached all Indians: A Right to Information (RTI) application filed by Ujjainee Sharma and Trishna Senapaty revealed that as of June 2015, 0.03 per cent of all Aadhaar numbers issued were to people without any pre-existing identification documents. The applicants suspect that the total number of residents of India who do not possess ID numbers is much higher.

Authorities take action against critics, researchers
Apart from challenges of outreach, data mismanagement and machine errors, recent events have proven that Aadhaar numbers can be easily disclosed, posted online and used for malicious purposes. On May 1, researchers at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore reported that an estimated 135 million Aadhaar numbers had been leaked online from four separate government databases.

While the government has warned that publishing UID data on portals can lead to three years imprisonment, a rule that likely deters some from posting UID numbers online, those reporting security flaws have also faced consequences.

When Skoch Group chairperson Sameer Kocchar showed in a February 2017 video blog post how the UID can be hacked, the UIDAI responded by accusing him of violating Section 37 of the Aadhaar Act.

Section 37 says,”Whoever, intentionally discloses, transmits, copies or otherwise disseminates any identity information collected in the course of enrollment or authentication to any person not authorized under this Act or regulations made thereunder or in contravention of any agreement or arrangement entered into pursuant to the provisions of this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with a fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or, in the case of a company, with a fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.”

In another incident, a case was filed against a journalist who showed on television how it was possible to obtain two separate UID numbers. To further complicate the issue, one may never know if their data has been breached, as the UIDAI refuses to disclose this type of information through Right to Information requests.

On Twitter, multiple users have tagged the @ceo_uidai and @uidai on relevant tweets, raising alarms against potential misuse of biometrics and leaks of UID data. But the Twitter handles of some of those who voiced the criticism have been blocked by government accounts. In responding to a subsequent RTI application asking the UIDAI whether they have banned anyone from their Twitter accounts, officials claimed otherwise.

A tool for surveillance?
Another concern of privacy and security experts is that UID can be used as a tool for mass surveillance by government or other actors.
Various government spokespersons maintain that UIDAI collects minimal information. While that is true, services based on UID collect more than minimal information. @kingslyj provides an example of two state government entities that do precisely that:

@pranesh Look at the difference in Aadhaar application forms between Karnataka -
… and Kerala -

he tool may also be further developed to collect more information in the future. Revelations by legislative researcher Meghnad from a debate in the Lower House of the Parliament earlier in 2017 indicated that DNA data might one day be included:

Fun Fact: when asked whether DNA would be a part of Biometric data collection in #Aadhaar, the FM said they might do so in the future.
Fun Fact: when asked whether DNA would be a part of Biometric data collection in #Aadhaar, the FM said they might do so in the future.
Centre for Internet and Society Executive Director Sunil Abraham has openly described Aadhaar as a surveillance tool:

Repeat after me: Aadhaar is surveillance technology masquerading as secure authentication technology.
Multiple national experts on law, privacy and technology have raised concern about the program's fraud and surveillance implications. New Delhi lawyer Apar Gupta, who has argued multiple privacy-related cases before the Supreme Court, explained in an interview with BuzzFeed News:

If your data is compromised in any way, there is absolutely nowhere that you as a citizen can turn to. There are no judicial remedies built into the Aadhaar program in case of identity theft.

Some of the worst fears of Aadhaar's critics were confirmed when a private company tweeted out a picture of what they could do with UID. The tweet has been deleted, but the original image has continued to circulate online:

If you don’t understand the full import of the phrase “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”, take a good look at @India_Stack
In one of seven open letters to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance that was scrutinizing what was then known as the National Identification Authority of India Bill, the Centre for Internet and Society laid down the inherent problems and pitfalls of using biometrics as an instrument of authentication, offering technical recommendations intended to help avoid exploitation of the system.
Billionaire Nandan Nilekani, who is UID's main architect and the co-founder of IT company Infosys, has acknowledged that privacy regulation is an “afterthought” of innovation and that India needs strong privacy laws after claiming for years that the scheme had built-in privacy and security features. Upper House MP Rajeev Chandrasekhar did not fail to miss Nilekani's 


Views "evolve"
2015 - #Aadhaar ensures privacy by desgn ;
2016-2017 massve data leaks n breaches ;
2017 - Need a data privacy law
In the background of this ongoing debate, the Attorney General of India has argued in court that ‘privacy is not a fundamental right’ and has even referred to it as a concern of the elite or the corrupt.

It is worrying to see the government not respond adequately to concerns raised by the citizens, and even to punish those who have shed light on Aadhaar's flaws. This combined with a broad-based denial of privacy as a fundamental right gives the impression that they do not have plans to stop or even address the problems with the system.


Written by

Sunday, March 13, 2016

9498 - Opposition Alleges Aadhaar Data Could Be Used For Mass Surveillance - NDTV

All India | Press Trust of India | Updated: March 11, 2016 18:22 IST







BJD leader Tathagata Satpathy said there are fears that a government of the day may use the provisions of the Aadhaar Bill for "mass surveillance". (File photo)


NEW DELHI:  The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) today tore into the provisions of the Aadhaar Bill, insisting that there is apprehension that it can be used for "mass surveillance" and "ethnic cleansing".

Participating in the discussion on the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill, 2016, Tathagata Satpathy (BJD) said there are fears that a government of the day may use the provisions of the bill for "mass surveillance" and "ethnic cleansing".

When a BJP member countered him saying there are no different races in the country, Mr Satpathy said there are at least four groups in the country and Indians can be divided on these lines.

He claimed that the United Nations had recently "misutilised" biometric data of refugees coming from Iraq and Syria to help certain countries keep a tab on them.

"More dangerous is collection of biological data," he said opposing the Bill. He said be it the UPA or the NDA, the mindset remains the same.

With a variety of cards like the voters identity card, why should the taxpayer bear the cost of "such unproductive" things, Satpathy asked.

Questioning the need to present the measure as a Money Bill, he said "It is not a money bill, full stop" and alleged that procedures were subverted to bypass the scrutiny of the Rajya Sabha.

Pointing at the officials sitting in their gallery in the House, he said the bureaucracy pushes for agenda and claimed that some official must have told the government that it is an important measure which should be passed immediately.

The discussion on the General Budget was interrupted for consideration of the bill, the BJD member said.

Mr Satpathy said since the term 'national security' has not been defined, the provisions of the bill can be used to "arm-twist political parties".

Initiating the discussion, Rajeev Satav (Congress) said that by going in for the measure, the ruling dispensation has shown that it was a "U-turn government".

He said Narendra Modi during Lok Sabha elections and former BJP chief Rajnath Singh had attacked the Aadhaar scheme, while then party spokesperson Meenakshi Lekhi had said BJP would seek a CBI probe into various aspects of Aadhaar.

Accusing PM Modi of playing petty politics on the issue earlier, he said the then Gujarat Chief Minister while criticising the scheme on one hand, had ensured 60 per cent implementation in his state.


Story First Published:March 11, 2016 18:22 IST