It is a hot topic in America: DNA software FST. This tool is used in one of the major crime labs of New York. The software is able to analyze two or more mixed DNA styles. These complex computer algorithms are able to distinguish different DNA. But critics recently raised some questions about the reliability of the software. They said that the code is flawed and not useable. There might even be people in jail who are not supposed to be there due to errors in the system. (nu.nl, 2017)
Some criminal defense experts do agree with the opinion that this system might have some flaws and they demanded transparency. This is a clear example of lack of transparency from FST, as it was not an open software and they did not share any details with the community of how the coding works. In 2016, the code was transferred to some experts and lawyers for use of the defense in a case, but still not public accessible (Coldewey, 2016).
As this can be a hot topic, my point of view is that these life changing software tools should have more openness to begin with. Although it might be dangerous to share the code with the public, the benefits can be huge as the public can help you develop a better system with their contribution. Arguments against this might be that hackers or smart criminals can use this code to their advantage and manipulate the software. This might lead to them hacking the system and manipulating the DNA match. On the contrary, crowds have knowledge. So making the code public available can offer you great benefits. What do you think? Do the benefits outweigh the downsides? Should such an important code be public and shared all around the world?
As I have never heard of the software, it is very interesting to take a look at the code. It can be found here at GitHub. So, if you are interested in building your own DNA software you might be able to transfer this code to your own computer ? https://github.com/propublica/nyc-dna-software
Other sources:
Nu.nl (2017) rechter VS maakt broncode DNA-software openbaar in belang van rechtzaak. Retrieved 22 October from https://www.nu.nl/internet/4973984/rechter-vs-maakt-broncode-dna-software-openbaar-in-belang-van-rechtszaak.html
Coldewey, D. (2016) Disputed DNA analysis software’s code open for inspection after court order. Retrieved 22 October from https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/20/disputed-dna-analysis-softwares-code-open-for-inspection-after-court-order/
Hi Alwin,
Thank you for this very insightful post. The use of technology to extract, store and analyse biometrics is a very hot topic within the tech industry. Company’s are constantly re-thinking ways to make your smartphone, your laptop, your social account, e-mail account safer. Using biometrics seems sensible enough: you and you alone can access your device, social account, e-mail account. However, the problem all stems from the storage of this sensitive data. The data is still stored in a database on a server or in the cloud.
If this database is accessed, unauthorised users have access to….you. When your social account gets hacked, you can easily change the password, set up a two-step verification and call it a day. You are safe, for now. Until you are hacked again. So you repeat the process again: reset password, two-step verification. You’re safe. with biometrics this is no longer the case. We only have a set amount of fingers in our hands (assuming we are not going to see companies ask to unlock/log in, with our toes). But perhaps the even bigger problem is the fact that the unauthorised user has access to your biometrics information, which is naturally, not changeable.
There is a huge debate going on regarding this topic and I highly encourage you (and everyone else stumbling upon this comment) to take a look at the following article: https://www.wired.com/2016/03/biometrics-coming-along-serious-security-concerns/
What do you think? Do you think the pros of incorporating biometrics in technology outweighs security and privacy concerns?
Hi Alwin, very interesting topic! I think it’s very hard to answer the question whether the code should be publicly available or not. As you said, there could be innocent people in prison right now or in extreme cases they could even be waiting for their death sentence even though they’re innocent. If the only way to prevent this is by making the code public, the owners should definitely look into this. However, the consequences that arise if the wrong people get their hands on the code could be very bad, because we’re talking about the privacy of millions of people. Therefore, if the software should open up at some point I would suggest to not give everybody access to it, but just a small controlled group of unbiased people after extensive screening. In this way the owners of the code will keep control over it, which is not really possible if anybody can access it.