[Chapter-delegates] Privacy : Why are private business operators empowered to insist on biometrics?

[Eve Edelson]

This gives me a lot to think about.
Certainly fraud and terrorism must be fought.
But can an  'anti-state' be defined as anything a government doesn't like?
"Blasphemy"? Basic political opposition? Use of a VPN?

Our president (USA) & his crowd have made not-very-veiled threats to pull
broadcasting licenses from organizations they don't like, stop critical
tweets by an ex-president, etc.
So far they can't do it, but they are working hard to move the dial on what
is acceptable.


===

On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Waqas Hassan <waqas.hassanz at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi sivasubramanian
>
> Biometric verification system (BVS) had been initiated and completed in
Pakistan two years back. BVS was launched as a part of the country's
attempts to streamline the database of subscribers' antecedents since the
misuse of SIMs was alarmingly high. By misuse, i refer to fraudulent,
obnoxious, anti-state and terror activities. Unverified SIMs were blocked,
about 26 million to be exact. Now a days, a new SIM can only be activated
after getting it biometrically verified.
> I am not sure if a similar strategy is being adopted in India as you have
mentioned only one operator that is asking for biometric verification in
the email.


===


> On 5 Dec 2017 18:02, "Sivasubramanian M" <isolatednet at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Might be happening everywhere. In this instance, Airtel, one of India's
Telecom operators requires all subscribers to bring their National Id cards
to their premises and present biometrics to them for 'verification'.  Where
is this leading to ? (See the image in the forwarded mail below that says,
"visit the nearest Airtel store with your Id (Aadhar), give your
fingerprints)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20171205/5f840f51/attachment.htm>