Government Technology: New Alcohol Sweat Monitor Threat To Privacy

washingtonpost.com:

The idea that governments could monitor its citizens' every move with technology has been the stuff of fiction for decades, and the technology that allows people to create invisible fences for other people has been around for almost 20 years. But in a world with E-ZPass, spyware and surveillance cameras, the notion that law enforcement is increasing its ability to monitor people's physiological states unsettles privacy advocates.

Read the whole story: washingtonpost.com

Comments

[slarabee]

The problems with the SCRAM monitor go beyond privacy.

They are not accurate and they are far easier to beat than you would think.

First of all any perfume or other cosmetic containing alcohol can lead to a false positive.

Next they are very expensive. The county I live in charge $20 per day so if you were sentences to 6 months of monitoring it would cost you $3600.00.

I can tell you of one case I know of where the person wearing the monitor used leather from a standard work glove to fool the monitor. He simply cut the leather into a square moistened it with warm water and placed it between the monitor and his skin and then wrapped the whole thing in plastic wrap. It worked without and he was able to drink undetected.

The funny part about it was that after about a month on the monitor he realized he did not want to pay the exorbitant fees and it would be cheaper just to do the 90 days in jail for violating his probation. So he went out drinking and waited until he was good and drunk and then removed the leather and plastic from the unit. Neither the Deputy at the Sheriff's office nor the people at SCRAM could understand how his monitor went from 0% BAC to .16 % BAC in 15 minutes.

So the thing is the SCRAM can be beaten, is far too costly and is subject to false positives.