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

Friday, December 28, 2012

2710 - Aadhar: A Shaky Foundation






Sudha Nagaraj Bharadwaj, Journalist | 8/30/2012 |  The prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh, no doubt had the best of intentions when he announced on August 15 that government money would be credited directly into citizen bank accounts through the use of Aadhar numbers.

India has 147 centrally sponsored assistance programs, and embezzlement and corruption commonly prevent financial assistance from reaching the hands of the intended parties. Bank credits would be an effective answer to siphoned-off monies.
However, Singh's choice of Aadhar, a unique identification number for Indian citizens, to help the initiative, has touched a raw nerve. The $3.6 billion project -- complete with biometric security, an application development platform for welfare services and a public-private-partnership model -- has a growing number of opponents.
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) headed by Nandan Nilekani, former co-chairman of Infosys, is functioning as an arm of the Planning Commission under an executive notification. The National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010 introduced in Parliament has been rejected. In other words, 200 million unique identity numbers have been issued without the consent of Parliament. What's more, Aadhar has just entered its second phase with a mandate to issue 400 million more unique identification numbers.
Also, Aadhar is at loggerheads with the National Population Register's (NPR) $2.8 billion resident card project under which a 64kb chip smartcard is being distributed across coastal states. Aadhar will roll out in 16 states and union territories while NPR will cover the rest. The competing but sometimes overlapping programs create confusion and the chance for errors and privacy breaches.
Finally, the public has been told that acquiring an Aadhar number is voluntary. However, subsequent announcements -- by state governments, service agencies, and indeed the generation of Aadhar numbers for NPR data -- are designed to systematically make the number so ubiquitous that it is rendered mandatory.
To add to the distrust, the business model has also thrown up a generous share of flaws. A network of registrars, enrollers, operators, and verifiers help capture data. While registrars are more often than not state government agencies or trusted institutions like banks, UIDAI is also free to appoint enrollment agencies. UIDAI is paying Rs 50 per enrollment. Several irregularities came to light during the first phase in this system.
State registrars wanted the non-state registrars to share data with them -- but this threw up data confidentiality and privacy issues. It was decided that the residents' approval would be sought before information was shared with anyone, including third parties. However, the operators who did the enrollments were found ticking the box for approval without explicit consent from the residents. The UIDAI has now devised a data sharing policy with additional safeguards for registrars, but India lacks a national data privacy law.
Worse yet, in Andhra Pradesh -–which is at the forefront of Aadhar with 25 percent enrollment -- an Aadhar card was issued bearing the photo of a mobile phone instead of a person's face. Bypassing "foolproof" biometrics (a combination of 10 fingers, an iris scan, and a photo), an enrollment agent completed 30,000 enrollments in six months, including 870 in the "biometrics exception" category.
With the Aadhar process proving so vulnerable, every aspect of the UIDAI project is being viewed with suspicion.
The use of biometrics as an identifier is also being questioned, even as Aadhar outshines the US-VISIT program as the largest biometric enrolment in the world. The Aadhar enrollments are permitted for five-year-olds and older. But the human iris and fingerprints acquire a lasting character only after eight and 16 years of age respectively. Heavy manual labor, application of mehendi (a russet-coloring agent of plant origin), and the superimposition of the operator's own handprint while pressing down a resident's fingers may also compromise fingerprint authenticity. Diseases like diabetes, glaucoma, and retinopathy are also risk factors.
Some argue that biometrics as authentication is dangerous, because once compromised, it cannot be re-secured. The UIDAI has however claimed that 10 fingerprints in combination with two iris scans and a photograph of the face, is unbeatable as a unique identifier. It also plans to repeat enrollments at the age of 15 years and set up permanent update centers to correct anomalies in the enrollment process.
As the UIDAI, plods along determinedly, almost obstinately, answering every question posed with more technological solutions, one has to wonder whether it will even work. While clearly eliminating corruption and bringing banking services to more people is a laudable goal, the system seems to be working for the sake of itself rather than for those it is enrolling. The Prime Minister, the government, and the UIDAI may need to step back and reassess Aadhar if it really is going to meet its promises