FC: Query on designing privacy-friendly Omnilock surveillance system

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Wed Feb 05 2003 - 10:06:16 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: State governments already Poindexterizing us for tax bills"

    ---
    
    Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 09:59:30 -0800
    To: declanat_private
    From: Douglas Thomas <douglastat_private>
    Subject: Query, potential politech post
    In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20030205112657.01994ec0at_private>
    Mime-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
    
    I am not sure if this is politech-worthy, but I shall ask regardless.
    
    My program has just installed an particularly odious device called an 
    Omnilock (http://www.omnilock.com be sure to check the creepy eye logo on 
    the home page) on all of our classroom doors within our building.  They are 
    now "keyed" to individual faculty IDs and the locks, conveniently enough, 
    provide an "audit trail" of the last 5,000 users.
    
    These audit trails are fed into a Windows DB, called the OmniLock 
    Faciltiies Manager.
    
    Now, here is my quandary.  I have been charged with writing a privacy 
    policy about how the information collected from the Omnilock audit trails 
    may be collected, stored, accessed and used.
    
    The faculty is in agreement that such information should not be collected, 
    stored, accessed or used in any way shape or form.
    
    So, how does one write such a policy that doesn't make the poor tech 
    support people's (who are trapped in the middle of this) lives hell, yet at 
    the same time makes it impossible to use these locks for surveillance 
    (which I assume was the rationale for the shift since keys have all the 
    required qualities to simply limit access).  More to the point, how do I 
    write this such that it has language which is both legally binding and 
    would be actionable if violated?
    
    Is there a simple way to set up an anonymous system to delegate 
    authorization codes which would allow the lock to know the person is 
    "authorized," but not necessarily who the person is?  Does anyone have 
    experience with the way these locks work?
    
    I thought I'd ask, as this is an opportunity to actually intervene in the 
    deployment of a surveillance system and I'd love to get feedback from as 
    many people as possible.
    
    Best regards,
    Doug
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Feb 05 2003 - 10:23:20 PST