Slashdot Mirror
Mitnick Supports A Federal DNA Database
Mike_K writes: "According to this interview, Mitnick supports the idea of creating a federal DNA database. He says that today's technology makes identity theft really easy, and we need a way to make sure you are who you say you are. A summary of the interview can be found here." That's not really the central point of the interview, but it is an intriguing one. Think what you will of Mitnick, his court-imposed computer deprivation hasn't stopped him from peering and poking at the technological world.
IMO, the government's methods of record keeping are what caused identity theft to become possible in the first place.
Identity theft is the process of obtaining key information about a person, such as (in the US) their social security number, driver license number, date of birth, etc., and then obtaining bank accounts, credit cards, etc. using that information. Ask yourself why knowing someone's SSN makes it possible to get credit cards in their name.
If you live in the US, how often are you asked for your social security number? And how often is it requested by a non-government agency? As an example, I recently had an eye exam. They requested my SSN and driver license number. (I gave them neither.) Why do they think its their business to ask for that information? Social security is for retirement (and taxes). The use of social security numbers by government agencies or private companies is not required or forbidden by law. Citizens of the US are not even required to have a SSN. These days, however, it has become a personal identification number. It is now used in public schools and universities as a student number. Banks require it to open accounts or issue credit cards. Ask yourself if any why this is wrong.
Government DNA records keeping may be extremely convenient. It's easy to think of the advantages of any government program -- that's what the government wants you to do. But whenever the government wants to implement something and they start telling you why it's so good and so beneficial, stop and ask yourself what the disadvantages are, because those will come back to haunt you and everybody else later. Try to figure out what else may be behind DNA records besides just identity theft prevention. Imagine to yourself that this idea is just one of a series of ideas that together will give the government more control over your life than you will find comfortable. This is not far-fetched, and it is not a conspiracy theory. It's just an observation of history -- people in high places want to be in higher places.
Let's compare this to computers. Nowadays, it is difficult to crack some of the more secure systems. Take the *BSD OS's... I receive email notification of compromises and patches when they are found. Most of these compromises are buffer overruns and stupid things like that, but when many bugs like that are used in complicated sequences, it is possible to get access to private information. The government is like a huge operating system. Laws are like program statements. If some folks in high places want more control over your lives, they find the little exploits in the laws and use them to modify the system in their favor. Ask yourself: can DNA records keeping be one of many complicated steps that it takes to gain more control over a country?
Finally, every system run by humans will have mistakes. There is no question of whether or not mistakes will be made in DNA record keeping -- they will be made. If this is put in effect, and the government mixes your record with someone else's (or if somebody manages to switch records around on purpose) how will you prove who you really are? "I'm sorry [sir,ma'am], that's what the computer says." "But the computer is wrong." "I'm sorry, we must go by what the computer tells us." Ask yourself if this is what you want, and seriously consider the disadvantages first. The advantages are without saying.
Just my two cents worth...
Nathaniel G H
If someone figures out how to spoof biometrics-based security or identification in some system, there's absolutely no way of issuing new IDs and passwords... I much prefer systems that allow me to do something about a security break-in.
...who doesn't worship at the alter of Mitnick. I saw serveral interviews with the guy right after he was released and he did not strike me as being particularly insiteful or up to date. Additionally he had the annoying habit of explaining things at the microscopic level of detail, which is why, I assume, you no longer see him on Good Morning America.
I found it particularly amusing when he was asked to comment on the Melissa virus. What was going through the TV producers head on this one - perhaps something like 'computers, illegal, Mitnick!'
As to what makes Mitnick an authority on biometric identification and identity theft, I have no idea.
Mitnick was a competent cracker in his day who was made an example of by some corporations and the US government. His 15 minutes are now up.
-josh
This would be great. As an amployer, I'd no longer have to worry whether I was hiring someone with a congenital predisposition to, say, Tay-Sachs; I could just call up the DNA registry. My health insurance premiums will plummet. And when they finally figure out the gene responsible for being gay, I could keep those weepy flamers out too ('course, I'd have to make some other excuse since that sort of discrimination doesn't play well these days). And I'll just bet that there's a gene in there that makes one susceptible to alcoholism. Anyone having that won't be working at my place either, AA member or not.
"If I have seen further than other men, it is by stepping on their glasses." - Michael Swaine
...He has said he felt like James Bond. Still, according to figures calculated by law enforcement officials (figures that Mitnick disputes), he caused at least $300 million in damage, with millions spent on new security systems alone.
Only $300 million worth of damage? Blofeld's oil rig, Goldfinger's base, at least two Russian nuclear submarines, a Columbian drug factory, a biotechnology research lab, countless souped-up cars, helicopters and motorcycles... Mitnick's nothing compared to Bond.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Biometrics is a bad idea over any kind of public network.
Well, at least until genetics advances to the point where we can clone new thumbprints. But then that just opens the door to a new kind of identity theft.
In a related story, a washed-up con recently transfered from Lorton Federal Penetentary was quoted as saying:
"I have to wear an orange jumpsuit with a serial number on it. At first I didn't like it, but now I do. I never have to worry about what I am going to wear, and people always recognize me. When they greet me in the yard, they say 'hey 2355232 whasup?'. When it's time for lights out, the gaurd just punches my number into his Palm Pilot and they know that I'm safely in my cell. I think every American should be issued an orange jump suit with a number on it. It would be great for the country."
I value Mitnik's remarks about as much as I value the remarks of this fictional convict.
Please stop worshiping at the altar of this tired-out loser. Karma to spare. Do your worst.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I don't want the government recording my DNA. That's just a bad scene waiting to happen. Even if it's only a hash code generated from my DNA, it's just not cool. Canada leads the way here, although I think the USA is now running DNA databases of criminals.
A far better idea for preventing identity theft is through the use of a smart card system and strong encryption (2048+ bits). You could generate a public/private key pair, of which only the individual knows the key - and the key is assigned at birth or issue date, with no information about the password recorded at the goverment site (maybe a backup of the smart card in a secure location). That way, you can present the public key for people like credit reporting agencies, who can issue you financial information encrypted with it - without that smart card + password, you're SOL if you want to steal someone's identity.
Another problem with using DNA is that more criminals are going to get wise to law enforcement becoming STUPIDLY dependant on DNA for investigations. Obviously the criminal element isn't too bright - what if you went and got some hair - ever get your hair cut at a barbers? Or blood - ever donate? Or any other combination of fluids / skin whatever - we're talking MINUTE quantities - and use it to plant false "evidence" for someone. Much akin to hiding an ounce of pot in someone's car who's going over the border and "calling ahead", that person is fscked.
Oh well. I'm a cynic, DNA databases are the future, maybe I should start writing DNA law enforcement software, eh. :)
..don't panic
I didn't realize the amount you pay in taxes was the most important indication of freedom.
In any case, from what I can tell, the income taxes I would pay in Taiwan would be about $18,000 a year as compared to the $21,000 I pay here. That's hardly "almost no taxes".
And in return for that saving of $3,000 a year I get to move to a country that only four years ago instituted real democratic elections and has just this year dropped almost 20 places (down to 51st) on the Economic Freedom index.
And why would you complain about government control of health care and then move to Taiwan?
And don't they include your fingerprint on the National ID card they issue in Taiwan?
Wasn't it just last year that the Publication Law, the one that required all publications to be registered and approved by the government, was annulled?
I've read that Taiwan they can impose the death penalty for illegal ownership of guns and that gun control is stricter than in Japan.
Wasn't there a government report about rapant abuse of wiretaps by law enforcement agencies in Taiwan?
I mean, not to say that Taiwan is a horrible place or anything, but it was only in 1987 that martial law finally ended. I don't think they are quite the utopia you think they are.
The cost of ensuring protection of one's identity by indexing DNA comes at a cost.
You can probably understand any further problems, as the witness no longer has as much guaranteed secrecy as before.
This is one step closer to Big Brother. This is all we need, more control and monitoring of our personal and private lives by the government. This is just a step away from government mandated drug testing, government control of health care, and the ability for the government to track anywhere you have been from your DNA signature, and other losses of Privacy and Freedom. If the governement wants my DNA, I'm moving to another country where my privacy is respected. Doesn't anyone else see this as a danger to our privacy and freedom as I do???
This database could even be used, a few years down the road, to attempt to clone famous personalities or provide genetic material to hopeful parents looking for donors.
I'm sure I've hardly scratched the surface of the possible benefits here. There have to be a lot more possible upsides to this - does anyone have an idea I've missed?
Bruce
Bruce
You are the real Bruce Perens.
I notice that ZDNet has a whole freakin' story about his one toss-off comment. Here's what he said:
Notice he said "such as your DNA." Not, "yeah, the government should definitly scan our DNA."
All he's saying is biometric data is the only way to be sure, and identify you as you. DNA is probably a bad example of this. I agree with him in that biometrics of some sort is probably the most crack-proof method that we could come up with to ensure identity. If he'd said "a central retinal scan database" instead, we wouldn't have a story. Seesh.
Although... it would be somewhat amusing if in the future, every contract were signed in blood...
As another aside, I read this interview yesterday, and came off kinda liking him a bit, which is more than I can say from the whole "Free Kevin!" thing. He even mocks his worhipper k1dd1ez . "d00d, make me a 1eet HaXoR!"
I've never been impressed by this particular script kiddie. I've never even heard any *rumors* of him having any coding cred.
Sure, his punishment was absurd, but that doesn't make him anything more than a punk.
As for his opinons on a DNA database, I say who the hell cares what he thinks? I'd sooner listen to Tipper Gore's opinions on rock and roll lyrics.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
What the f**k!?! How does getting caught and sent to prison for cracking some computers make you an expert on all things technological. Am I going to be presented by some article with Mitnick's take every time something comes up in the technical world? He hacked, he got caught, he went to jail. His story is over.