[The question at this stage is why exactly was this clause altered?
The answer is not clear especially since the government has adopted
blitzkrieg tactics to pass the Bill through Parliament.]

http://scroll.in/article/806297/no-longer-a-black-box-why-does-the-revised-aadhar-bill-allow-sharing-of-identity-information

OPINION

No longer a black box: Why does the revised Aadhaar Bill allow sharing
of identity information?

A seemingly minor amendment to the 2016 bill that could have
significant privacy ramifications has not been received adequate
debate.

Updated Yesterday · 11:34 am
Prashant Reddy

The hacking of a Turkish government database containing close to 50
million personal records of the country’s citizens is yet another
reminder of the vulnerability of electronic databases. The entire
population of Turkey, is estimated at 77.69 million people. This is
the second major database to be hacked in recent times, the first
being a data breach in the United States government which affected 21
million federal government employees.

These massive data breaches come on the heels of a national debate in
India on the various aspects of the Aadhaar project that was recently
approved by Parliament when it enacted The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery
of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefit & Services) Bill, 2016. One
aspect which hasn’t been debated substantially is a seemingly minor
amendment to Clause 8(4) of the Bill, which can have significant
privacy ramifications. To understand this amendment it is first
necessary to narrate the early assurances provided by the Unique
Identification Authority of India and its Chairperson, Nandan
Nilekani.

Just Yes or No

As originally conceived, the Aadhaar number was to be generated after
collection of relevant demographic information (such as address, age,
date of birth) and biometric information (such as photographs,
fingerprints and iris scans). The number generated were then to be
used by either the government or a private entity to authenticate a
person carrying out a transaction which required him or her to
establish their identity. Prior to the introduction of the Aadhaar
Bill in Parliament, the UIDAI had maintained that the authentication
process would generate only a "yes" or a "no" in response to an
authentication request, without actually sharing any of the personal
identity information stored with the requesting authority.

This understanding can be confirmed in an explainer put out by the
UIDAI. On the very second page, a neat explainer clarifies that
Aadhaar authentication will “[r]eturn response to requesting agencies
as Yes/No’ and will not “[r]eturn personal identity information of
residents”.

This assurance was reiterated by Nandan Nilekani. In an interview to
NDTV, responding to a question on whether the information collected
would be shared, he had said:

“It is a black box. The purpose of this data is only in
authentication. When you go somewhere to receive a service and you say
I am Sreenivasan Jain, the system will reply it is him, or not him.
That’s all it does. Only a yes or a no.”

Nilekani’s description gives the common man an impression that the
Aadhaar project was designed in a manner that only allowed for
personal information to be deposited in the Central Identities Data
Repository without any mechanism to allow any person to extract such
personal information. A crude analogy of a “blackbox”-style operation
would be a vault in a bank that is constructed in a manner that it has
a slot to allow people to deposit information in it but there is no
way for any other person to open the vault and retrieve the
information. In the case of the Aadhaar project, the information in
question was only be used to authenticate a request from outside but
would never itself leave the firewalls of the repository.

This guarantee was underwritten in Clause 5(2) of the National
Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 introduced by the United
Progressive Alliance government which clarified:

“Authority shall respond to an authentication query with a positive or
negative response or with any other appropriate response excluding any
demographic information and biometric information."

Thus any of the information collected by the Authority was not to be
shared with the requester. This fact is further substantiated
currently by the UIDAI website, which clearly states that during
authentication “No personal identity information is returned as part
of the response.”

The change

The Aadhaar Act, 2016 however completely alters this provision. Now
renumbered as Section 8(4), it states:

“The Authority shall respond to an authentication query with a
positive, negative or any other appropriate response sharing such
identity information excluding any core biometric information”.

The difference between the different versions of this provision is
that while the 2010 Bill states no identity information will be shared
during the authentication process, the Aadhaar Act clearly gives the
UIDAI the power to share identity information back with the requesting
agency. The only information excluded from being shared is core
biometric information such as fingerprints or iris scans.

Therefore, once you provide certain information to a requesting
authority performing the authentication, the UIDAI while confirming
the identity can legally share with the requesting authority the
personal identity information of the person requesting authentication.

Contrary to common perception, the authentication process under the
UIDAI does not mandatorily require a resident to submit either
fingerprints or iris scans, which are the only unique identifiers.
According to the UIDAI explainer referenced earlier, there are five
types of authentication techniques – two of these types don’t require
either fingerprints or iris scans for authentication. These two forms
of authentication can take place in conjunction with either
demographic information such as date of birth, name or address OR in
conjunction with a one-time-password delivered to a mobile phone or
email account associated with the Aadhaar number. Therefore, at least
theoretically, it is possible for a “rogue” requesting authority to
key in the Aadhaar number along with a name or date of birth to the
UIDAI and in return get back more personal identity information such
as the address or photograph.

Since demographic information isn’t conclusively defined in the
Aadhaar Act and this function has been delegated to the UIDAI, it is
not known just how much information will eventually be collected by
the UIDAI.

Whether these nightmare scenarios actually play out, the fact remains
that the “black box” system of operating which was considered a
fundamental operating principle of the UIDAI has now been overturned.

***The question at this stage is why exactly was this clause altered?
The answer is not clear especially since the government has adopted
blitzkrieg tactics to pass the Bill through Parliament.*** [Emphasis
added.]

Prashant Reddy Thikkavarapu studied law at the National Law School of
India University, Bengaluru, and at Stanford Law School. He is a
practising lawyer based in Delhi.
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to