The Employee Privacy Risks of Company Chips
Technology today is amazing and unstoppable, but is some new tech crossing the privacy line?One company, Three Square Market, a software developer…
November 03, 2017 at 01:18 PM
6 minute read
Technology today is amazing and unstoppable, but is some new tech crossing the privacy line?
One company, Three Square Market, a software developer for vending machines, has a new voluntary program to employees, where a microchip is implanted in their hand. The chip then allows the employees to open doors, pay for purchases, share business cards, store medical information, and even log into their computers. The chip is making certain tasks easier for people, but could also be creating serious privacy risks.
Michael Whitener, a VLP partner, recently sat down with Inside Counsel to discuss the risks associated with company microchips, including employee privacy, data collection policies and data misuse–and even hacking.
The privacy risks are that the personal information contained in the chips–including credit card information–would either be misused by the individuals' employer or hacked by a third party. For instance, a hacker could use an RFID scanner to read and copy the code on the chip.
“However, these privacy risks are really no different than the risk of someone stealing a wallet containing credit card information or hacking someone's passwords,” he said. “The fact that the information is contained in an implanted chip, rather than on a plastic card or other media, isn't material from a privacy perspective. In fact, one could make a case that an implanted chip is more secure.”
According to Whitener, Three Square Market launched a voluntary program whereby employees could have an RFID microchip the size of a grain of rice implanted in their hand, between the thumb and the forefinger. The microchip allows the unlocking of doors, purchases from vending machines, and logging into computers. It's essentially an identification device.
The real risk is that implantable devices might become a job requirement and expand beyond a convenience for employees, which appears to be the sole purpose of the Three Square Market program, into a means of allowing employers to track and monitor employees. U.S. law already allows employers to conduct rather sweeping monitoring of employees while on employer premises or using employer-provided equipment (including phones and computers).
“Of course, the 'creepy factor' is high when it comes to implanted devices–it calls to mind movies that portray dystopian surveillance societies, including 'Gattaca' and 'Minority Report,'” he explained. “But there's nothing about the Three Square Market program itself to justify those concerns, because the microchip doesn't have tracking capabilities.”
So, is this the wave of the future, or will privacy concerns stop this from going mainstream?
Per Whitener, implanted devices can be seen as the next evolution from the types of wearable devices that have already become quite popular, from the Fitbit to the Apple Watch. In addition, biometrics (fingerprints, iris scans, facial recognition) are already an increasingly common means of identification – so small implanted devices are arguably less intrusive and pose fewer privacy risks than personal biometric features that are unalterable. At least an implanted device can be removed.
Amanda G. Ciccatelli is a Freelance Journalist for Corporate Counsel and InsideCounsel, where she covers intellectual property, legal technology, patent litigation, cybersecurity, innovation, and more.
Technology today is amazing and unstoppable, but is some new tech crossing the privacy line?
One company, Three Square Market, a software developer for vending machines, has a new voluntary program to employees, where a microchip is implanted in their hand. The chip then allows the employees to open doors, pay for purchases, share business cards, store medical information, and even log into their computers. The chip is making certain tasks easier for people, but could also be creating serious privacy risks.
Michael Whitener, a
The privacy risks are that the personal information contained in the chips–including credit card information–would either be misused by the individuals' employer or hacked by a third party. For instance, a hacker could use an RFID scanner to read and copy the code on the chip.
“However, these privacy risks are really no different than the risk of someone stealing a wallet containing credit card information or hacking someone's passwords,” he said. “The fact that the information is contained in an implanted chip, rather than on a plastic card or other media, isn't material from a privacy perspective. In fact, one could make a case that an implanted chip is more secure.”
According to Whitener, Three Square Market launched a voluntary program whereby employees could have an RFID microchip the size of a grain of rice implanted in their hand, between the thumb and the forefinger. The microchip allows the unlocking of doors, purchases from vending machines, and logging into computers. It's essentially an identification device.
The real risk is that implantable devices might become a job requirement and expand beyond a convenience for employees, which appears to be the sole purpose of the Three Square Market program, into a means of allowing employers to track and monitor employees. U.S. law already allows employers to conduct rather sweeping monitoring of employees while on employer premises or using employer-provided equipment (including phones and computers).
“Of course, the 'creepy factor' is high when it comes to implanted devices–it calls to mind movies that portray dystopian surveillance societies, including 'Gattaca' and 'Minority Report,'” he explained. “But there's nothing about the Three Square Market program itself to justify those concerns, because the microchip doesn't have tracking capabilities.”
So, is this the wave of the future, or will privacy concerns stop this from going mainstream?
Per Whitener, implanted devices can be seen as the next evolution from the types of wearable devices that have already become quite popular, from the Fitbit to the
Amanda G. Ciccatelli is a Freelance Journalist for Corporate Counsel and InsideCounsel, where she covers intellectual property, legal technology, patent litigation, cybersecurity, innovation, and more.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
How Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
After Mysterious Parting With Last GC, Photronics Fills Vacancy
Porsche's Venture Capital Arm Adds General Counsel From Clifford Chance
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250