Defense Department 'eDNA' Plan Withdrawn

An anonymous reader points out this report on News.com from Declan McCullagh of a far-reaching plan (now withdrawn) to curtail much online privacy through the use of biometric markers, excerpting "The idea involved creating secure areas of the Internet that could be accessed only if a user had such a marker, called eDNA, according to a report in Friday's New York Times." Perhaps they'll withdraw the plan to track everything you buy next. Update: 11/24 17:38 GMT by T : Here is the original New York Times report from John Markoff.

Comments

They can still steal your organs in your sleep!

[I Am The Owl]

Now, I've been watching the government very closely lately (because I know they do the same to me!), and here's what I've learned:

• Even though they are "withdrawing" the plan to steal your DNA fingerprint to scan your organs for compatability with top world leaders and military figures, they will most certainly come up with another, more insidious method of tracking everything I do and violating my Constitutional online rights to privacy!
• They are going to take all my personal information, gleaned from the radioactive emissions from the dye that was injected into my veins during my alien abduction, read my thought patterns and link it all up in a big government database where they can read my buying habits and then jump me in a convenience store and cut my balls off while I scream in terror at the giant drone android they will use to do the job.

So be careful about the DoD. Just because they draw one of their insidious plans back into their black helicopter doesn't mean there's one of the fuckers right behind you ready to steal your precious radioactive bodily fluids for further study.

You must remain constantly vigilant. I have not slept in 4 weeks, and neither should you, if you knew what they were up to!

privacy

[sstory]

I think I'm going to print out copies of a story about this, or the Total Information Awareness plan, or the USA Patriot act, for when people ask me, "Why in the world did you join the ACLU?". Previously I've answered that by telling them that I didn't want a state-imposed religion, but many christians don't see a problem with that.

Re:privacy

[Kr3m3Puff]

I recently joined the ACLU and am now a card carrying member. Strange coming from a middle-class republican backgroun. I am 29 now, and feel that at least a contrary response is needed, so that we don't go off the deep end. I don't agree with everything they say, but at least they are there speaking up and deserve some of my hard earned money.

I also a couple days ago became a card carrying member of EFF which is probablly more palletable to us technologists. I would encourage everyone to at least look at their website. Too often it is easy for us to click and read, instead of taking action. At 29 I have started writing my first letters to my congressman. He is a republican, who doesn't share my views, but still he needs to know as his constituate, that I don't like his voting style. Sure, it is one small drop in the ocean, but enough drops will create a flood.

Whether all the changes going on upset you, or if you like them all, we should all stand up and let our voice be heard. Too many of us, including myself, sit on the sidelines. I was at a concert for Counting Crows recently and Adam the lead singer said "The reason the country is run by a bunch of old people is because us young people don't stand up for our selves."

History will tell...

[Kr3m3Puff]

I think we are so close to all of this right now, that we really won't know the impacts of technology on society and our governments ability to "control" it.

I truly think we are on a verge of some sort of revelution and one side will win. It is hard to tell which one it is. Either it is freedom of information (which inheritatly includes some anarchy) or a Orwellian controlled society that is something out of a sci-fi book.

What I don't think that we realize right now, is that we are on the threshold of that. Will our grandchildren look back at the DCMA and say "that was the start of it all". Who knows. In my gut, I feel that the DCMA, the dawn of the second millenium after Christ, is a defining moment in who we are as a species.

Fear and paranioia feed one side, and the desire to be free and uncontrolled feed the other. Who will win? Will open journalism keep us free, providing a double check on our governments, or will our freedoms be etched away, until we are left with nothing, comfortable in our little cage, none the wiser. Will information and freedom be nothing more than a commodity sold and developed by Microsoft? What does the future hold?

Opinions and comments welcome...

How do we get the genie back IN to the bottle?!

[elizalovesmike]

Apparently SRI is the group who got paid $60k to have this workshop on creating eDNA and the idea was widely (and it sounds like pretty communally) denounced and essentially rejected as technically unworkable (problem-laden) not to mention problematic w.r.t. privacy issues.

Also, apparently there was a huge flame war over how to present the group's findings. The individual initially charged with this ended up being relieved (gratefully, I'm sure) of these duties. Gee, ya think it was because the people gathered together felt *the most* strongly about the total lack of privacy aspect of this? I am inclined to think this was most definitely the case.

Anyway, this all is a problem; so what, it won't be eDNA - but only because they couldn't (at this time) get the job done!

I also find it ironic that the name of this program was pitched as "eDNA" - the reason this made me smile but very wearily is that I keep lobbying against TIA and its assorted ramifications ------ and one of the arguments I use is that as soon as (a) our DNA can be cheaply decoded (it currently can be decoded by Craig Venter) && (b) the information decoded actually means something (i.e. there is still a ton of speculative work into which diseases each of the proteins correlates to and to what degree etc.) you gotta believe that your little double helix's meaning is going to be hard coded along with every snarky e-mail you ever sent, every time you laid yourself out on the line in an e-mail, every purchase you made, when you made it, what it was, what your medical - ENTIRE medical - history is etc. etc. etc.

To a previous poster: don't worry, son; I also am not sleeping. . .

Gattaca?

[Flamesplash]

What? You mean Gattaca didn't drive everyone away from this idea already?

Re:(Another) American Revolution

[Okojo]

It's quite possible the current political parties are very disappointing and they do not follow the will of the voters but the will of those with money. We are stuck with a bipartisian mediocrity and cannot easily elect third parties to office due to flaws in the U.S. democratic process. For example, representatives and senators are elected as all or nothing-- if 20% of the population votes for a particular independant party, there is no guarantee that any person of that party is elected. In some European countries, the equivalent of representatives are elected by percentage-- in this case 20% of the representatives will be from the independant party. Likewise, voters for the presidential elections have only one choice, whereas in other democratic countries, voters choose the candidates in the order of preference. This prevents the whole Greens vs. Democrats problem that plagued the previous presidential election, in which Green voters (who'd rather have a Democratic president than a Republican even though voting Green may tip the scales and cause a Republican to win office). Not to mention presidents aren't even chosen by popular vote...

Remember the second amendment! Don't let the government disarm the people.

internet ID card

[Wouter Van Hemel]

As much as I am pro freedom and privacy, and hate the power of the state and big corporations like a good leftish boy, there are good reasons to have some kind of identification on the 'net... No CC fraud, less spam (accountability for one's actions), and a definate way to prove who you are.

If it's implemented in a way that I can decide to use this identification, when, where, and how I want, without any possibility of being forced to do so, there is no privacy problem. If you don't want to give the information, you don't. If you need to do it, you can.

The internet could use a way to identify people for who they really are; as long as it's not mandatory or enforcible, it's only a positive thing, in my eyes.

You see, when you buy something with a credit card, or when you just really want to prove to someone who you are, you _want_ to give some information already. There is no privacy issue, since you want the information to be known; you can just back it up with proof.

It could be used as an optional extra check to avoid CC fraud, for instance.

Maybe it's time we blow of the dust of the (e.g.) pgp protocol, and try to find a way to make a official central directory in which we can be sure anybody is who he claims to be. If you don't want to use it and remain anonymous, you don't have to. It's all about choice.

I wonder why PGP isn't more popular.

Fantasy vs Reality

[SnakeStu]

If it's implemented in a way that I can decide to use this identification, when, where, and how I want, without any possibility of being forced to do so, there is no privacy problem.

Indeed -- and if I can win the lottery I will have no financial problems. These are nice things to fantasize about, but they're not wise to plan on when the odds are so fundamentally against them happening.

Remember, the Social Security Number in the US was originally supposed to be only for the purposes of administering Social Security. Now it is "mandatory" for a wide range of things including just having a place to live (e.g., as part of an application for an apartment, a mortgage, etc.). When I was growing up (and I'm only in my 30s so this isn't ancient history!), I didn't need an SSN until I was ready to get a job. We applied for them as part of a 9th grade class; none of my fellow students had one. Scant decades later, my children were required to have an SSN application submitted almost immediately upon birth.

Maybe it's time we blow of the dust of the (e.g.) pgp protocol, and try to find a way to make a official central directory in which we can be sure anybody is who he claims to be.

You mean, like a keyserver?

I wonder why PGP isn't more popular.

Probably because "average" people don't understand it and the principles of trust surrounding it. Nor do they want to learn, because, as Thomas Edison put it, "Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think."