Thoughtful Biometrics for DNA — Part 6

This article is the sixth in an introductory series leading up to the Thoughtful Biometrics Workshop 8,10,12 March 2021.

Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) is the one-dimensional ultimate unique code for one’s individuality — except for the fact that identical twins have identical DNA patterns.

It is, however, currently used mostly in the context of forensic applications for person recognition. DNA IDs (also called DNA profile) is the process of determining an individual’s DNA characteristics.

DNA profile VS Genetic profiling

DNA ID profiles are not Genetic Profiles — the two tests look at different aspects of an individual, are performed for different purposes. A DNA ID identifies an individual, while a Genetic Profile is designed to assess an individual's health and contains essentially every piece of genetic information in the human genome. To put this in perspective, a DNA ID contains approximately one-millionth of the information in a Genetic Profile.

DNA ID is mostly used as a forensic technique in criminal investigations, comparing criminal suspects’ profiles to DNA evidence so as to assess the likelihood of their involvement in the crime. It is also used in parentage testing to establish immigration eligibility and genealogical and medical research.

DNA IDs are far more accurate than any other biometric modality, including conventional fingerprints, facial recognition, iris scans, and voice recognition.

Besides identifying an individual, DNA IDs can do two other things:

• DNA IDs can determine gender. This is accomplished by determining if an individual has just X chromosomes (female) or X and Y chromosomes (male). Gender is a politically-charged topic in some circles today — so to be clear, DNA IDs determine gender based solely on chromosomes.
• DNA IDs from two or more individuals can be compared to determine if the individuals are close biological relatives. DNA is passed from parent to child, and each child inherits half of his or her DNA from each parent. That means that by comparing DNA IDs, it is essentially always possible to determine if two people are parent, and child, often possible to determine if two people are likely to be siblings, and sometimes possible to determine if two people are likely to be grandparent-grandchild or aunt/uncle-niece/nephew. The use of DNA IDs in kinship analysis has been applied to Law Enforcement (familial searching), paternity testing, immigration, and disaster victim identification.

However, some issues limit the utility of DNA IDs: (a) contamination and sensitivity: it is easy to steal a piece of DNA from an unsuspecting subject that can be subsequently abused for an ulterior purpose; (b) The present technology for DNA matching requires cumbersome chemical methods (wet processes) involving an expert’s skills and is not geared for on-line non-invasive recognition which consumes time.

Rapid DNA

Rapid DNA is a term used to describe the fully automated (hands-free) process of developing a DNA ID from a reference sample buccal (cheek) swab without human intervention. This

The Rapid DNA's goal, which the FBI has initiated, is to link approved commercial instruments capable of producing a DNA profile within two hours to the existing DNA IDs infrastructure to search unsolved crimes of special concern while a qualifying arrestee is in police custody during the booking process. A machine designed to perform such rapid DNA analysis is called a DNA “magic box” by enforcement authorities.

The use of the term “reference sample buccal (cheek) swab” is intentional. The Rapid DNA efforts have been focused on the DNA samples obtained from known individuals (e.g., persons under arrest). Because known reference samples are taken directly from the individual, they contain sufficient amounts of DNA, and there are no mixed DNA profiles that would require a scientist to interpret them.

Several manufacturers have developed instruments for Rapid DNA analysis, such as IntegenX, now part of Thermo Fisher Scientific based in Waltham, MA, and ANDE based in Waltham, MA. Following commercial availability, the FBI works with federal, state, and local laboratories such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Defense Forensic Science Center (formerly the Army Crime Laboratory) to test, evaluate, and validate the hands-free instruments for law enforcement use.

In 2012 the Palm Bay, Florida Police Department received the first commercially produced Rapid DNA unit placed in a police agency, an IntegenX RapidHIT 200 system. In January 2014, after a year of testing and validation, the Palm Bay Police began generating leads on real-world criminal cases, including producing a DNA profile in 90 minutes that linked a suspect to a burglary of a U.S. soldier’s home that occurred while he was in Afghanistan.

In May 2019, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection piloted a Massachusetts-based ANDE program. The program intends to expose “family unit fraud,” the idea that asylum-seeking adults and children traveling together are illicitly posing as biologically related. In June 2019, a $5.2 million contract to expand the program was awarded to Bode Cellmark Forensics, Inc. Although the tests are voluntary, the consent forms indicate that a refusal to be tested may factor into decisions related to their amnesty conditions. Privacy advocates are concerned that the program is not truly voluntary, use a narrow definition of family, and may have too high a rate of error.

DNA databanks

A DNA database or DNA databank is a database of DNA profiles that can be used to analyze genetic diseases, genetic fingerprinting for criminology, or genetic genealogy. DNA databases may be public or private, the largest ones being national DNA databases.

DNA databases are often employed in forensic investigations. When a match is made from a national DNA database to link a crime scene to a person whose DNA profile is stored on a database, that link is often referred to as a cold hit. A cold hit is of particular value in linking a specific person to a crime scene but is of less evidential value than a DNA match made without using a DNA database.

Critics of DNA databases warn that the various uses of the technology can threaten individual civil liberties. Personal information included in genetic material, such as markers that identify various genetic diseases, physical and behavioral traits, could be used for discriminatory profiling. Its collection may constitute an invasion of privacy.

Some people are afraid that their personal DNA information will be let out easily, others may define their DNA profiles recording in the Databases as a sense of “criminal,” and being falsely accused of a crime can lead to having a “criminal” record for the rest of their lives.

The application of DNA databases has been expanded into two controversial areas: arrestees and familial searching. An arrestee is arrested for a crime and has not yet been convicted for that offense. Currently, 21 states in the United States have passed legislation that allows law enforcement to take DNA from an arrestee and enter it into the state’s CODIS DNA database to see if that person has a criminal record or can be linked to any unsolved crimes. In familial searching, the DNA database is used to look for partial matches that would be expected between close family members. This technology can link crimes to the family members of suspects and thereby help identify a suspect when the perpetrator has no DNA sample in the database.

Privacy issues surrounding DNA databases not only means privacy is threatened in collecting and analyzing DNA samples, but it also exists in protecting and storing this important personal information.

As the DNA profiles can be stored indefinitely in the DNA database, it has raised concerns that these DNA samples can be used for new and unidentified purposes. With the increase of the users who access the DNA database, people are worried about their information being let out or shared inappropriately. For example, their DNA profile may be shared with law enforcement agencies or countries without individual consent.

This article is the sixth in an introductory series leading up to the Thoughtful Biometrics Workshop 8,10,12 March 2021. Additional articles can be found as follows:

• A gentle introduction to Thoughtful Biometrics — Part 1
• Thoughtful Biometrics for Facial Recognition — Part 2
• Thoughtful Biometrics for Fingerprints — Part 3
• Thoughtful Biometrics for Iris — Part 4
• Thoughtful Biometrics for Voice — Part 5
• Thoughtful Biometrics for DNA — Part 6 (this article)
• Thoughtful Biometrics Overview — Part 7
• What is Identity Management — Part 8