A device straight out of Gattaca has been installed in an American police station near Philadelphia. The police are ecstatic, since the “magic box” almost completely automates DNA fingerprinting and spits out a report in 90 minutes, while a forensic matching request takes up to a month.
With Rapid DNA technology, samples taken from a crime scene can be immediately matched against suspects, the case closed, and police can go home with a little more lightness of heart than their lives generally permit. This technology is bound to spread fast, and could soon be available in a police station in Bulandshahr or Shamli.
However, detractors point out that the technology needs to find a clearly defined place in the regulatory framework of DNA matching. Contaminated samples lifted by poorly trained personnel would bring up false positives, complicating criminal cases. More importantly, there are privacy concerns. Police forces worldwide have always had a native enthusiasm for rounding up, on flimsy pretexts, characters whom they deem to be suspicious. If they also take swabs, innocent people could find themselves on forensic DNA databases for no better reason than being poor, or of a certain colour or persuasion, or for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
As we know, there’s no stopping progress. Despite all the privacy concerns expressed, biometrics are the only reliable passwords of the future, because no password generated by a human or machine could remain uncrackable once quantum computing become practicable. DNA analysis, too, is an infallible fingerprint, and it has remained restricted to science fiction only because science had not come up to speed. Now, Rapid DNA is here, and apart from forensics, it could become a standard mode of authentication. But every technology has a dark side, and its use should be closely regulated.