Slashdot Mirror
Biometric ID Cards Ready For Trial In UK
0ctal writes "Looks like us lucky Brits are getting ID cards no matter what... A 10,000 user trial starts next week. There's been a fair amount of debate on this recently, and it's been coming for some time, but live trials are sooner than expected. The trial is set up to evaluate three competing biometric products. Qinetiq, quoted by the story, are a government backed company set up to use MoD tech in civilian apps."
Visit the site, write a letter then Fax your MP.
Qinetiq Would that be the same incompetent lot that "lost" a barge full of landmines in the English channel? Not sure I would turst them with this kind of project.
As for people being in favour of this scheme. There was a big online have your say for this last year. Several thousand people objected, they some how lost all of these negative votes and decided to count them as 1. That way they still had a majority in favour vote from the Chancellors freinds (me cynical?)
It hasn't had to pass through parliament because so far it isn't compulsory.
Furthermore, it would probably pass without too much problem because there is generally good public support.
>News of the pilot follows an opinion poll suggesting 80% of people backed a national ID card scheme.
If by "stupid" you mean deploying a system meant to be universal to a small handful of people, then you are right. Which is why trials like these are not done in that fashion. They will not pick any old 10,000 people. Typically in situations like this they would find a town with a population of around 10,000 people and give the cards to everyone. Then they could put the card readers everywhere appropriate, and nobody who lived in the town would feel left out.
It wouldn't be a proper test of the cards if they didn't actually scan them once in a while. And they can't put the scanners all over the country for a limited test; so they can't distribute the test cards truly randomly, where any person in the country is likely to get one. So they will probably pick one 10,000 person town. Or, better yet, three 3,333 people towns; one for each company.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
"Are you realistically worried that our (free world) goverments are gonna show their true face and prune out all those with less than blue eyes? "
9
Aschroft recently sought information on doctors who perform abortions using his new found anti-terrorist powers.
He also sought information on Anti-war protesters again using his new terrorist powers.
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=1790
Thats just two incidents we know about because they were leaked. Now (under Patriot 2) its a crime to leak what he's using his terrorist subpoenas for.
A republican senator is equating voting for Kerry with being anti-American.
The problem as ever is not: "If you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear." but rather "if your government never does anything wrong you have nothing to fear".
Not strictly true. Great Britain is: the combined Kingdoms of England and Scotland plus the principality of Wales.
It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. So the "indigenous" population is British and Northern Irish.
Mind you, we're such a bunch of Mongrels anyway: Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Poles, Germans, Dutch, French, Normans. What most people mean when they try to define "British" is "White like me".
Historically the UK has absorbed a real hodge-podge of peoples and they've been assimilated into the general population: which culture being transferred in both directions.
The recent problem has been that new migrants haven't been doing that and it's been exacerbated by the ridiculous notion of "multi-culturalism". A bigger pile of PC crap I have never heard of (In fact the Council for Racial Equality's head recently confessed that the CRE's push for multi-culturalism in the 70s was a big, big mistake).
A country can only afford to have ONE culture: new comers' cultures get absorbed into the greater whole and they themselves should pick-up the local culture: the most important element being language. I'm constantly astounded at how badly some 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants speak English.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Multi-culturalism is itself a cultural attribute. Not easy to engineer, but not impossible either. Canada earned its multi-cultural credentials with Quebec, leaving an uneasy union of British and French. The recognition of two national languages went a long way to head off the tyranny of either.
Toronto is now home to dozens of languages (plus English & French) and, except around World Cup time, is quite sane. The cultures are melting, but they are melting at the edges, instead of being shredded and spun vigorously.
Actually, it's a myth to say that the British constitution is not written down. Large parts of it are, but in lots of different places. It's just that there is no one document labelled "British Constitution".
Further: the EU constitution will do very little to curb the powers of the UK government. If the UK government decided to suspend general elections, the EU constitution would have nothing to say about it. However, they would never get the required law through parliament and our Head of State would refuse to sign the act.
Even further: the Government's powers are limited. There are lots of examples of things they have failed to do in spite of the huge majority they hold.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Thats not stricktly true.
The UK police have been quite successfull in stopping a few events.
1)Downing civil airliners with portable SAM launchers
2)Gas attack on underground
3)Confiscated 1/2 ton of fertilizer bomb
So demand laws that will draw a clear line at what is acceptable. Don't just bitch at everything that you percieve to be bad, ask for what you want.
lol - you really don't understand UK law. We don't have a constitution you see - basically what happens is this:
Someone does something the Government doesn't like, or finds a loophole in a law.
The Governement changes the law to make it illegal.
People don't want ID cards - the Government is citing some bullshit survey that allegedly happened and that 80% of people said they would be happy to carry cards. - Bollocks. Last year after the Government mentioend it found 1000 people wanted cards, the stand.org.uk website generated 5000 registrations from people opposed to the scheme. The Government discounted their votes as they were from the Internet (however you can bet your life had they been pro-card they would have been counted).
It's all bullshit and facade. There is no democracy here.
What exactly is to stop them using someone elses ID?
That would be the biometric identifiers. The word is even used in the slashdot headline, it's not like you even need to read the article to find that out!
A latent existence
Government surveys always remind me of this exchange from Yes, Prime Minister
Sir Humphrey: "You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don't want to look a fool, do you? So she starts asking you some questions: Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people without jobs?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think young people welcome some authority and leadership in their lives?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think they respond to a challenge?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Oh...well, I suppose I might be."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes or no?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told you can't say no to that. So they don't mention the first five questions and they publish the last one."
Bernard Woolley: "Is that really what they do?"
Sir Humphrey: "Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those. So alternatively the young lady can get the opposite result."
Bernard Woolley: "How?"
Sir Humphrey: "Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the growth of armaments?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "There you are, you see Bernard. The perfect balanced sample."
If you think this is Funny, then you should read Fun with Fingerprint Readers from May 2002 issue of Crypto-Gram Newsletter by Bruce Schneier:
Interesting, isn't it? See also: T. Matsumoto, H. Matsumoto, K. Yamada, S. Hoshino, "Impact of Artificial Gummy Fingers on Fingerprint Systems," Proceedings of SPIE Vol. #4
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I'll answer my own rhetorical question I asked in my (rejected) submission: what countries will follow if Britain is successful? Answer: all other modern world countries -- only a matter of time here in the US, imo.
Here is a article mentioning at least some of the uses of national ID cards:
A few tidbits on countries with national ID cards (snagged from this Dec 2001 article):
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
IIRC, the Data Protection Act means your data SHOULD be free (as in freedom) for you to view and you have the right for the data to be correct. Also, I don't believe the DPA allows the data to be taken out of the country and adequite protections must be in place to prevent the data from being accessed by people without the authority.
Will it be an offence if your card comes into `accidental' contact with something like microwaves.
Private Eye had an article recently pointing out 7,000 UK government security ID cards have gone missing from Westminster and other government buildings in the last year alone.
Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
Biometric information will not be a practical deterrent to identity card theft and fraud. The only pieces of information that will deter theft are the pieces that can be checked by everyone - the photograph and the signature. Thus the cards will not be any more secure than passports or driving licenses. In fact the identity card will be an identity thief's dream - a single card that's accepted everywhere, from banks to benefit offices to police checkpoints, and which (unlike a passport) will routinely be carried in the owner's wallet.