Beginning this term, students can enter the Class of 1953 Commons using palm biometric recognition technology. In addition to the new system — which consists of three gates at the dining hall’s entrance — students can choose to swipe in with their physical ID cards at one remaining swiping station.
Roughly 2,000 students have enrolled in the new system, Dartmouth Dining director Jon Plodzik wrote in an email statement to The Dartmouth. He wrote that he believes students “want to use” the scanners and consider them a “modern addition” to dining at the College.
Tyler Lucca ’26 said he “felt so cool” the first time he used the scanners.
“I generally believe in the progression of technology,” Lucca said. “When those gates opened for me, I felt like a Jedi — it was sick.”
Dartmouth Dining purchased the hardware and supporting software for the system to “improve” the speed of entry to the dining hall and ensure that meal plans are used by the respective owner, Plodzik wrote. The biometric technology is provided by IDEMIA, a technology company that specializes in biometrics and cryptography.
Plodzik added that no Dartmouth Dining employees have lost their jobs in the transition to the palm biometric scanner system. Prior to the installation, two Dartmouth Dining greeters — rather than the current one — swiped students into ’53 Commons.
Shisui Torii ’27 said he noticed that the time needed to enter ’53 Commons is “better than the old card swiping system.”
“So far it’s been a good experience,” Torii said. “It’s … easier than taking your card out of your pocket.”
However, other students disagree about the convenience and necessity of the new system. On Jan. 7, messages reading “Resist hand scan” and “Resist the hand” appeared on the public blackboard in ’53 Commons.
Bradyn Quintard ’25 said he believes the change to palm biometric technology was “completely unnecessary.” Quintard added that he had not seen the entrance to ’53 Commons bottleneck in “years” until the scanner system was implemented.
“[It is] horrible timing at the beginning of winter when it’s so cold out,” Quintard said. “Really most of the bottlenecks in [’53 Commons] are at the actual meal stations, which [Dartmouth Dining has] done effectively nothing to address.”
Robert Boxwell ’25 said he believes Dartmouth Dining should have first installed a single gate to “pilot” the program and collect feedback before adopting three lanes. He added that the gates, which allow one-way movement, “cut the outgoing traffic” out of the dining hall.
“It is a minor inconvenience that adds up,” Boxwell said.
Quintard added that he believes the language on signs promoting the system is “intentionally misleading.” At the entrance of ‘53 Commons, there is a sign with an arrow pointing to the physical ID swiping station that reads “Dining Dollars (DBA), Credit Cards Green2Go” and another arrow pointing to the gates that reads “meal plan swipe.” Students are still able to use meal swipes at the physical ID swiping station.
“Some people I talked to thought [hand scanning] was mandatory,” Quintard said.
Other students expressed concerns about the collection of biometric data needed to use the scanners. Dara Casey ’25 said she does not like sharing personal forensic information. Quintard added that there is “no reason to introduce the risk of collecting biometric information” because the physical ID system worked “fine.”
“I understand that they’re using … a proprietary algorithm with mathematical numbers, whatever that means,” Quintard said. “We have no reason to trust it as secure. We have no reason to trust their management of it.”
Plodzik wrote that data privacy concerns are “unfounded” because “there are no fingerprints or impressions stored in the software.” He added that the shared data is not “valuable to anyone.”
“The system has been vetted by the College’s IT group and is used by lots of colleges, businesses, government offices and sensitive restricted labs,” Plodzik said.
Boston University, Florida State University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Vanderbilt University are among the schools that have adopted biometric systems.
While computer science professor Tim Tregubov is not involved with the hand scanner system, he said the biometric system is “fairly safe” because it is likely that a “local biometric system is not uploaded anywhere.” Tregubov added that the system includes a one-way hash for encryption, so it cannot recreate a user’s hand.
However, Tregubov said he believes an “unintended consequence” of automation systems is fewer personal interactions between employees and clients.
“When mobile orderings became a thing, it was much easier to order, but there were now no longer interactions with the baristas,” Tregubov said. “… Profit increased, but personal connection decreased.”
Casey said she “enjoys little interactions” with dining workers that were facilitated by the previous system and is “disappointed” that these interactions may be lost with the installation of the scanners.
“It is really nice when [Dartmouth Dining] workers ask you how your day is,” Casey said.
Plodzik wrote that he believes more students will enroll in the future because he does not “see a downside” to the system. He added that those who do not enroll “are destined to stand in a line waiting for entry.”
“I think of this just like the EZ Toll Pass system many states use,” Plodzik wrote. “In the beginning, many people thought it was better to not change until they saw it in action.”
However, Quintard, Boxwell and Casey said they are not enrolled in the system and do not plan on enrolling.
“If people are not enrolled at this point, they never will,” Casey said.
