Naavi.org

According to the Caravan report about the proposed new Data Protection Act /Privacy Protection Act which the Srikrishna Panel has tabled, a suggestion has been made for amendment of the Aadhaar Act to introduce what is called “Offline Authentication”.

A discussion has already ensured in the professional circles, how the “Offline” authentication can be done without a copy of the Aadhaar data being kept outside the CIDR and whether it will introduce new data breach risks.

However, I feel that just like the introduction of the Virtual Aadhaar ID which stepped up the security of the Aadhaar data by several notches and took the wind out of the anti-Aadhaar lobby, it is likely that this “Offline Authentication” system may also turn out to be a good practical suggestion that can ensure that Aadhaar system survives the critical scrutiny of the Supreme Court.

Just to think of one of the measures by which this system can be introduced, we can envisage that UIDAI may authorize “Identity Certification Agencies”.

This could be  part of the Digi Locker scheme and Digital Certificate Scheme run under the CCA. In such a scheme certain agencies may be licensed to make verification based on “Virtual Aadhaar ID” submitted by the Aadhaar user (Global KYC agents can perhaps use the real Aadhaar ID itself) and maintain a mirror identification data base of “Members of its service”.

These agencies could be be similar to the “Data Trusts” which Naavi had proposed earlier. Individuals could deposit their ID information with these agencies who may be private sector agencies who may have access to technology which they claim are better than that of UIDAI. Their data base may be maintained on the basis of their membership and the linked Virtual Aadhaar ID.

If there is any data breach at these “Trusted Intermediaries”, then UIDAI cannot be blamed. Also the loss can be recouped with the change of the Virtual Aadhaar ID.

Hence this move will both address the issue of insulating the CIDR from too much of access by public and also silence the critics by challenging them to be the secure repositories of the data if they are capable rather than blaming the Government all the time.

For the positively minded, this is an additional opportunity to create a business out of the need to secure personal data.

It is therefore time for the Critics of Aadhaar to accept the challenge thrown at them by the Srikrishna panel and find solutions to make offline Aadhaar authentication feasible without the fear of personal data breach.

Naavi

The media has been reporting many incidences of lynchings in India apparently caused by spread of rumours through the WhatsApp messaging system. Some of these may be “Fake” news and some may even be “Genuine” information which has evoked violent reactions due to the emotional content of the messages.

There was also a recent confusion created by news report that “Forwarding of a Message is equivalent to endorsing of a message”, arising due to a wrong interpretation of a Court decision.

In the light of the above, there have been some indications that WhatsApp itself may be introducing some changes into its system such as “Restricting forwards” or “Flagging a Forward” etc.  Such measures are welcome.

However, the solution to the problem may not lie in merely restricting the forwards to five or indicating that a “forward is actually a forward”.

It is clear from the developments that many of the lynchings that occurred in recent days had a political over tone meant to discredit the current regime and build up a narrative for the forthcoming elections. Media which is biased in favour of the opposition is hand in glove with building of such a narrative. Hence in many instances, the forwarding of a message or publishing of a message is only an “Excuse” for a “Crime already contemplated”.

Since in many cases, the investigations are also biased, truth might not have come out.

While WhatsApp or Bolo may try to find their own methods to improve reliability of messages it is necessary for persons using different means of expression on the Electronic media to ensure that they follow certain ethical principles.

While every person who originates a message can take care at his personal level to be ethical and avoid deliberate false messages, we cannot rule out the need for forwarding of messages of doubtful veracity either to check if it is true or to fore-warn if there is a potential risk if the message is ignored. Hence some “Conditional Forwarding” should be possible without attracting the wrath of the law.

Flagging a forward as “Forwarded as Received, Authenticity not Checked or Guaranteed” could be a good disclaimer that can protect a person in law.

But over and above this, I propose that a voluntary “Ethical E  Expression Consortium” (EEE Consortium) be formed which provide a “Virtual Editor” service to the individual publishers. The members should be able to load their expressions which may be blog articles or twitter messages or Facebook posts into the forum repository in the form of a link and let some body else review the comment and suggest their removal if it is necessary. The authors may either post their message and then seek a review or wait for a while before publishing their messages so that some reviewer can alert them if they are going overboard.

This would be a self regulation for bloggers before the Government comes up with its own regulation which all of us may later criticise as “An Assault on Free Expression”.

Naavi