Home Office insists biometric data is secure -yeah, right!

I think that our elected leaders seem to have become overly enamoured of NIR and have forgotten that the technology, for all the things it can do, still is only as strong as the weakest link. And in relation to the concerns raised in the wake of the loss of 25million records recently, they have been missing the point. "The Home Office insisted that the biometric elements in its database, the electronic fingerprints and facial scans, will keep it secure and proof against identity theft, even if there were to be a major breach and stolen confidential data. 'The biometric means that it will be much more difficult to use somebody else's identity, as they will have to provide the correct fingerprint or facial image at the same time. You can't create a fingerprint or a face,' said a Home Office spokesman. He also emphasised that the identity register would also be protected by a chip-and-pin with severe penalties for those who tried to access the database illegally."
Yes, yes we know all that, but it isn't the point is it?
The difficulty is that my biometrics won't be used for online transactions, and may not actually be used for many everyday transactions which could cost me money. They also would not protect me if someone was able to get to data-entry points and substitute data. The weakness of the system will still be badly paid civil-servants or curruptable officials. It only needs one and all my biometrics could suddenly belong to someone else, or all my date could end up fastened to someone else's biomentrics and I'm an unperson. What the government seems to be failing to realise is that this incident shows that we can't trust the human infrastructure to this degree, no matter how much we could trust the IT (which is a doubtful assertion in any case).

Home Office insists biometric data is secure | Special Reports | Guardian Unlimited Politics: see also here and here.