‘They’re watching us:’ global biometrics survey paints a disturbing picture

A study of how 50 countries round the world work with biometrics has found that the UK is in the upper half of those surveyed – 12th out of 25.

And that means, claims online tech comparison resource that did the work, Comparitech, that while we’re far from being the worst offenders, we’re not too far off a red line it says suggests that the technology might start to be invasive.

The data, published on a blog on the company’s website this week, also identifies the five worst offenders, in order: China, Malaysia, Pakistan, the USA and “India, Indonesia, The Philipines and Taiwan” bunched together (perhaps a bit oddly) in fifth place.

In any case, argues the blog, that means the five getting high scores in the five metrics it chose indicates “they are showing a concerning lack of regard for the privacy of people’s biometric data [and that] through the collection, use, and storage of biometric data, these countries use biometrics to a severe and invasive extent”.

Perhaps not surprisingly, The Peoples’ Republic Of China managed to rack up 24/25, for a variety of reasons but its fondness for what Comparitech calls “widespread and invasive use of facial recognition technology in CCTV cameras” being a major factor.

But the US is also something of a bad boy here, too, at 20/25 – mainly down to extensive use of biometrics in passports, ID cards, and bank accounts, widespread use at the State level of biometric voting systems, the “growing use of biometrics in the workplace” and other factors.

And the UK? Well, we are in the better half of the table at least – just after Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus, but ahead of Romania – at 12 (Ireland gets 11 due to things like “only having a small database that includes criminal profiles, having extra safeguards for employee biometric data (e.g. consent is not always enough, which goes beyond GDPR requirements), and it isn’t part of the Schengen Agreement so doesn’t take biometrics upon entry”.

Specifically on biometrics in this country, the report claims that:

“On the whole, the United Kingdom does well because it only has small biometric databases, e.g. one for criminals and one for non-UK citizens who enter the country, and it is governed by GDPR rules.

“Facial recognition CCTV is also something that seems to be governed well.”

To get a score, the country involved was assessed on a range of criteria to arrive at five overall measurements, says the company.

These included things like if the national ID card (where used) or passport had a biometric element, whether or not biometric voter registration being used to a large extent, and if the country being scrutinised has a law to protect biometric data or not.

Commenting on the results, the blog’s author, tech freelance writer Paul Bischoff, asks the two key biometrics collection and analysis questions we probably all want an answer to:

“The use of biometrics is growing at an exponential rate [and] while using your fingerprint may be easier than typing in a password, just how far is too far when it comes to biometric use – and what’s happening to your biometric data once it’s collected, especially where governments are concerned?”

Go here for the full breakdown, including source material and a fuller explanation of the methodology utilised.

Comparitech describes itself as a “pro-consumer website providing information, tools, and comparisons to help consumers in the US, UK and further afield to research and compare tech services”.

Founded in 2015, it’s now a remote team of 30 researchers, writers, developers, and editors covering a wide range of online services including VPNs, password managers, ID theft protection, antivirus, Internet providers, network monitoring, and more.