Slashdot Mirror


Estonia Tests "Contactless" ID-Cards

borkee writes "Estonian MEAC and CMB start testing a new version of a national ID card containing what they call 'contactless' extensions. Although they do not specifically disclose to us, taxpayers, what technology is used there, it must be quite obvious that it's nothing less than RFID. Add to this, they'll have person's biometrics in memory. (Security gurus of course know: biometrics just don't work.) Soon you can track us poor Estonians by our GSM phones and by our ID cards too!"

251 comments

  1. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The depressing thing is that Estonia actually WAS in Soviet Russia. I don't recall that they were particularly happy with the situation.

    You'd think that the ex-Soviet countries would be really protective of their new freedoms...

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  2. so ? by DZign · · Score: 3, Insightful

    like someone wants to track you ?

    and as always when new technology is introduced, it will probably take a long time (let's say 2 years or so) until every department (communal house, police department, hospital,..) which needs to get information from your id card, will have the correct reader installed, so until then it's used the old fashoned way.

    btw are you guys required to have your id card with you all the time ?

    1. Re:so ? by asd-Strom · · Score: 4, Informative

      No we don't need to have our ID card with us all the time. It's required to own a card if you're older than 15 but you could just keep it home in a box.

    2. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No, of course we are not required to carry it all the time. I myself find the ID card very useful. I don't have a driver's licence and it's quite a pain in the a.. to carry the passport with me all the time. Mostly I need the ID card when shopping, because almost all shops ask some form of ID if paying with debit or credit card, when the bill is over 500 EEK (ca 32 euros).
      Also since Estonia has become full member of the EU, the ID card is a very convenient travel document within the EU/EEA borders. No need to carry passport. Tried/tested.
      As of contactless reading, do'nt know much about those plans.

    3. Re:so ? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      like someone wants to track you ?

      No, they're not interested in the average Joe as long as he remains that. But should he ever become or try to become someone of power and importance (or just too annoying), they'd love to have all sorts of dirt to wreck your life, career and credibility. It is considerable leverage both to prevent you becoming an influence, and controlling you if you do.

      The KGB etc. were notorious for collecting vast amounts of information. Most of it they never needed, but they had it in case that person was turning out to be a problem. As long as you are a good little pawn and do nothing "wrong", there is no problem. That was true even in the Soviet union. So then you don't have any problem with them gathering this information?

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It is not so obvious that you're not required to carry it all the time. In belgium for example you have to carry you're id all the time from you 16th birthday. If the cops stop you and you don't have it with you, you risk a ticket (depends on the cop in front of you).

    5. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, they--uh--the, no wait...um--I'll get back to you on that.

    6. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, you beat me to it.

    7. Re:so ? by DZign · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm also from Belgium so therefor my question too.

      I guess we're used to having it with us always and don't find this weird.

      It sometimes amazes me about all the fuzz some countries make (UK now, but otoh, UK is against just about anything new :-) when id cards are introduced,
      or I sometimes just wonder how countries like the USA can even operate well without id cards or anything like that.

      OK in the USA they use the social security number or driver license as id card, which gives problems with id theft because your unique key (which would be on your id card) is also used for other functions. Why not just put this unique key on your id card and only use it for identifying you ?

      OK people say then want to be free and do whatever they want. Bad luck. At the same time you want to get social security, get unemployment money, drive a car, and much more, so at least prove who you are when you want to cash that check.

      Having an id card and not needing to have it with you also gives the possibility for abuse.
      In the end the 'good' people who don't do anything wrong aren't bothered by it, and at least it can stop mis-use by people who want to defraud the system.

      Recently there was a program on tv about people in France driving without driver licenses (driver license with points, have to many violations and they revoke it), one of the guys had a friend who looked like him, so if he got stopped he said to the policeman he didn't have his papers with him, but his name was Y and then this friend would go to the police station to say he did the offence.
      Duh.. At least these kind of things could be stopped if you needed to have your papers with you all the time.

      That's only one example, I guess there are many more you can come up with in which people commit fraud by saying they're someone else.

    8. Re:so ? by grazzy · · Score: 1

      in soviet russia..

      you know, there is a free world outside of america too. we do not need resueing. rather, PLEASE dont rescue us.

    9. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Belgium appears to be one of the most strictly controlled states in the EU, I'm sorry to say. More examples: I've been told that in Belgium it is a crime to have a peaceful demonstration within sight of your royals, and this is actually enforced! Another example is the case of the Brussels-based German journalist whose offices were raided and who is given no right to protect his sources from police enquiry...

    10. Re:so ? by instanto · · Score: 1

      Its not about being a 'good guy with nothing to hide' its about freedom.

      Requiring an id on person at all times and being stopped by the police looking for "paperz please!" seems more like a gestapo, stasi or former USSR method.

      --
      // instant - "I for one welcome our new Decaff Coffee-Flavoured-Coffee Overlords"
    11. Re:so ? by aerique · · Score: 1
      In the end the 'good' people who don't do anything wrong aren't bothered by it,

      That's funny: I am a 'good'[1][2] person and I am bothered by these developments.

      Anyway, I can't continue on this topic at the moment (work), although I'd love to. Just wanted to prove you wrong on that statement.

      [1] Except for the occasional mp3 download. (The drugs I use are 'legal' where I live, thank god.)
      [2] What the hell is good anyway? Please define. Is it people who don't break laws? Is it people who are 'moral'[3].
      [3] I'd have to define that :) We're getting into recursion here. Bring your favourite CL implementation!

    12. Re:so ? by ahillen · · Score: 1

      Requiring an id on person at all times and being stopped by the police looking for "paperz please!" seems more like a gestapo, stasi or former USSR method.

      I also wouldn't like to be stopped regularly and without any apparent reason. But although I live in a country where you are in principle required to have an ID card (Germany), that never happened to me. I have to show my ID when I travel abroad (outside the EU countries which signed the Schengen treaty - between those there usually are no border controlls). I recently used it to get a parcel from the post office. Teenagers use it to show that they are allowd to buy alcohol and cigarettes (in case of doubt) etc. Most people just see it as a convenient standard for identification if needed. And most people would be quite surprised if out of the blue a policeman would come up to them and asked them: "Paperz please"

    13. Re:so ? by DZign · · Score: 1

      If you are being stopped by the police it's because they have real reason to suspect you of something, or if they just saw you i.e. do a traffic violation.
      So then they ask your id to write your ticket and know they have the correct id and not a name/id you just made up.

      Random stopping people and asking for their papers isn't happening if that's what you think or imply with the gestapo reference.

    14. Re:so ? by Pogue+Mahone · · Score: 2, Funny
      This begs the question "is the a free world inside America?"

      Posted anonymously to avoid observation by the KG^H^HDHS. Oh, damn...

      --
      Every bloody emperor has his hand up history's skirt [Peter Hammill/VdGG]
    15. Re:so ? by pjt33 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you go to an international airport, you should make sure your mobile phone is turned off, or people will clone it on the grounds that you'll be out of the country and won't notice for a few weeks. This contactless technology is looked upon favourably by Blunkett, so I face the prospect of having to take my passport to the airport wrapped in a Faraday shield to prevent people reading the information and burgling my house on the grounds it will be empty for a few days.

    16. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a disturbing vision of a certain Reich's henchmen saying in their best secret agent voice.... " PAPERS PLEASE!

    17. Re:so ? by mpe · · Score: 1

      No, they're not interested in the average Joe as long as he remains that. But should he ever become or try to become someone of power and importance (or just too annoying), they'd love to have all sorts of dirt to wreck your life, career and credibility.

      You also have the problem that there is a catagory of people interested in the "average Joe". Criminals, especially organised crime (which includes other country's "intelligence services), for purposes of identity theft...

      The KGB etc. were notorious for collecting vast amounts of information. Most of it they never needed, but they had it in case that person was turning out to be a problem.

      There is the problem of "data overload" or "failing to see the wood for the trees" type problem. As the German Democratic Republic found out a little too late :)

    18. Re:so ? by DZign · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not defending rfid's in id cards, I wouldn't like it myself either (as we always have to carry them, technically we would be easy to track then if there ever was enough infrastructury for this rolled out).

      I just wanted to say that id cards in general are not a bad thing on themselves.
      I wonder how other countries do without, and if this doesn't give more possibilities to for mis-use and fraud.
      My impression is they can be useful and help society in general, if used properly.

      However, people on /. always suspect the worst.
      OK anything can be misused and there should be strict rules what can (not) be done with them.

      And indeed, to answer (2) I was speaking about law-abiding citizens.

      Hmm. Now thinking about all this, I was going to write that people should at least have some trust in their country and they live (at least most of us) in a democracy. Just made me realise that I'm too optimistic about this and most governments are corrupt and imo democracy doesn't work. But that's another discussion.
      And extreme-right is becoming more popular here so the gestapo-reply by someone else here could actually become possible in 10 years or so. But that's worst case scenario..

    19. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In belgium for example you have to carry you're id all the time from you 16th birthday.

      This is specifically because in Belgium, police have the right to stop anyone, at any time, in any public place, just to check their identity.

      Most Belgians are rather phlegmatic about such things because they've essentially grown up with them (the mandatory ID cards have been around for as long as I can remember - I've been here since 1979), and Belgium is not a country where public opinion matters much anyway.

      If the cops stop you and you don't have it with you, you risk a ticket (depends on the cop in front of you).

      You can even be summarily arrested and held for up to 12 hours (24 if a prosecutor approves) pending verification of your identity.

      (going off-topic here, but it's worth mentioning) This does not depend strictly on not having your ID card on you, refusing to hand it over, or asking why you're being stopped (all of which are offences) - any cop can take you in if they decide, at their discretion, that further verification of your identity is needed. This possibility to detain people for up to 12 hours for no specific reason is known as "administrative arrest", and commonly used to hold public protesters until whatever they're protesting against (royal visit, nuclear waste transport, ...) is over.

    20. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And people wonder why there is so much hostility in the UK towards joining the "papers please" sheep of mainland Europe. Fucking idiots

    21. Re:so ? by thelexx · · Score: 1

      "If you are being stopped by the police it's because they have real reason to suspect you of something, or if they just saw you i.e. do a traffic violation."

      That is a rather naive point of view.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    22. Re:so ? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      but otoh, UK is against just about anything new :-)

      I think in general we're not against everything new here in the UK - infact we're generally quite pissed off at usually being the last to get something. The problem ATM is that the government wants to bring in a ill thought out ID scheme which will cost us tax payers millions, won't do any good, and most of the population don't want it. Unfortunately that goes for everything this government does - huge nationwide protests about the amount of tax on fuel, government does nothing. Huge protests about going to war with Iraq - government still goes ahead with it (despite the flawed evidence including outright lies). And now, the population protests about the ID cards (which the government's own reports says are going to be pretty useless) and guess what, the government is still going ahead with it.

      They have no chance of winning the next election, and good ridence to them.

    23. Re:so ? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Screw the KGB, look into the German Democratic Republic. They had more informers per capita than any other society in recorded history. There was a ratio of 1:63 full-time informers. Including part-time informers, the ratio was approximately 1:6.5. The Germans are still compiling personal files from the records the Stasi attempted to destroy; at current rates it will take another 375 years to finish re-assembling the estimated 37,500,000 sheets of shredded paper.

      Personally, I wouldn't care if they collected information, as long as I could trust the government. But I don't. So I do.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    24. Re:so ? by Oddly_Drac · · Score: 2, Informative

      "It sometimes amazes me about all the fuzz some countries make (UK now, but otoh, UK is against just about anything new :-) when id cards are introduced,"

      It's not that we're against everything new, it's more the clouds of spurious chaff thrown out by David Blunkett, the curious quantities of ignorance shown to con arguments and the ludicrous execution of said that tends to suggest that the taxpayer will end up shelling for a form of identity that *should be* adequately covered by photo driving licenses and passports.

      I should point out that the latter two identification methods have been redesigned in the past decade to stop counterfeiting, but in the case of the passports, blanks were on the streets within two weeks of the unveiling. Saying that you require another piece of identification is a tacit admission that your system is compromised, and we should be fixing those systems (seriously, I'll say it again...passports) rather than introducing another.

      One of the reasons why this isn't necessarily the case is that the real kicker for a national ID card is the national ID card database; that's why this is being pushed so hard.

      "At least these kind of things could be stopped if you needed to have your papers with you all the time."

      Yeah, we have photos on our driving licenses now. The procedure is that you're given a document that indicates what you need to go into a police station with, then you have to present them within seven days or you'll have a warrant issued for your arrest. That's the UK method.

      "At the same time you want to get social security, get unemployment money, drive a car, and much more, so at least prove who you are when you want to cash that check."

      To take your points;
      Social Security - We in the UK are issued a National Insurance number at 16. This is a primary form of identification because it links back to the Inland Revenue and the DSS. The same for unemployment money.
      Drive a Car - Photo driving licenses that are backed with a database at the DVLA in Swansea. Incidentally the same place that records your car ownership, and the primary database queried by police.
      Cash that check - Signatures are still considered the best form of identification for this, and most banks can call up a digitised copy of your signature for checking. I tend to carry my passport if more information is needed.

      In terms of confirming your identity in the UK, most times a photo id is requested (passport, students union, driving license) along with two utility bills or bank statements.

      This creates an 'intersection' of supporting information rather than relying on a single piece of documentation; a national ID card would be a single piece of information for which the only checking tools will available to law enforcement and government; given the record of other forms of ID, it seems unlikely that this will patch the hole it's intended for.

      --
      Oddly Draconis
      Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
    25. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Random stopping people and asking for their papers isn't happening if that's what you think or imply with the gestapo reference.

      Let me quess, you're white, right?

    26. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is the problem of "data overload" or "failing to see the wood for the trees" type problem. As the German Democratic Republic found out a little too late :)

      Yeah... Too bad they didn't have modern computing power and patern recognition algorithms...

    27. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "If you are being stopped by the police it's because they have real reason to suspect you of something"

      Really? You're obviously white, middle-class and living in a nice part of town. ID cards are widely used to systematically harass ethnic minorities and anyone else the police decide they don't like the look of. This is especially true in a country like Belgium, which I recall being critisised by Amnesty International for exactly this kind of Gestapo behaviour.

    28. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) It doesn't beg the question.
      2) You could argue that it raises a question.
      3) But, really, it doesn't, and no one else thinks you're funny.

    29. Re:so ? by the+chao+goes+mu · · Score: 1
      Doing without ID cards is no worse than working with a flawed ID card system. Probably better.

      If you have a flawed ID system it gives a false sense of trust. For example, (living in the US) I could tell you a dozen ways to obtain a false driver's license. However, when the police or a business tries to identify you, they will trust that document much more than they would a simple statement, yet that document is no more turstworthy.

      --
      Boys from the City. Not yet caught by the Whirlwind of Progress. Feed soda pop to the thirsty pigs.
    30. Re:so ? by the+chao+goes+mu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not just minorities. Try being white and entering a "known drug neighborhood". Worse, try being white and living in or near one. It is almost as if being white in the wrong part of the city is a crime.

      --
      Boys from the City. Not yet caught by the Whirlwind of Progress. Feed soda pop to the thirsty pigs.
    31. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to clear up a few things. I live in Estonia and I was one of the first people to get an ID card.

      1. You need photo ID for a few important tasks, namely when you go to the bank or if you're using your credit card to pay for something over a retailer-defined amount (generally 1000 EEK / 65 EUR). Most Estonians don't have driver's licenses (they are expensive to obtain, and public transport is relatively good). So you need to carry your passport or your sturdy plastic national ID card. I opt for the ID card. You are not required to carry it, but in daily life you will find many reasons to use it.

      2. The ID card costs most people about 10 EUR. I read the article quickly and it didn't state if they would raise the rates for this new card.

      3. Knowing a person's citizenship in this country is somewhat important. Roughly 250,000 people (about 20%) of the people in this country have NO citizenship in any country. This is due to the Soviet Union disappearing and these people were ineligible for both Russian and Estonian passports off the bat. So they end up with no citizenship at all. This is even more important to know now that Estonia is an EU member and certain benefits/rules only apply to EU citizens.

      4. In my opinion, the "smart" part of the ID cards so far has been a failure. The current ID cards have a chip on them, and you have 2 PINs for the card. One allows you to electronically sign documents, and the other lets you pass information to another person (or something like that). You can use it to login to a select (like.. 5) websites.. if you want to spend 20 EUR to buy a USB card reader (few do). I've never been given the option to electronically sign a document at the bank by using my ID card.

      5. I applaud Estonia for trying to implement new technology in a real-world environment. However, I would be interested to see what's driving this. The cards are made by a Swiss firm, and they have a vested interest in introducing higher-priced cards.

      6. The adoption rate of the ID card after it was introduced in 2002 was a bit slow, so to get people onboard, the Tallinn city government introduced a new scheme for public transport passes. Earlier, 30-day passes were a physical piece of paper. Now you just buy your pass online or with an SMS, and give it your ID number (like a social security number -- which is also printed on the ID card). If the inspectors come by on the transport, they slip your card into a reader and can determine if your pass is valid. This allowed them to introduce 2-tier pricing, 1 for those who live in the Tallinn area and a higher price for those who live outside the area. They claim this was just to allow them to offer 2-tier pricing and make pass purchasing simpler, but I think it was to get everyone to use the ID cards. The adoption rate after the system went into effect was much higher, naturally.

    32. Re:so ? by aerique · · Score: 1
      I'm not defending rfid's in id cards, I wouldn't like it myself either (as we always have to carry them, technically we would be easy to track then if there ever was enough infrastructury for this rolled out).

      I just wanted to say that id cards in general are not a bad thing on themselves.

      Agreed, it's not so much the ID cards themselves I object to as well as the obligation to have them on your person at all times and the obligation to show them to a police officer whenever one asks for them.

      Sigh... back to work :-)

    33. Re:so ? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      It might be, but in the U.S., if you are stopped for no reason, you have grounds to sue.

      In fact, in an effort to reward good drivers, some places stupidly pull over good drivers and give them rewards (I don't remember what, but like movie passes or something). Obviously, the people being pulled over because they were driving well are very annoyed (they were obviously on their way somewhere).

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    34. Re:so ? by cluckshot · · Score: 1

      The remark that citizens should have some trust of their government is just ignorant. The government should always be suspect. History is full of the murders and userpations of government. The 20th century saw 200 million people murdered by their nation states and only a minor fraction by criminals. In every case the first line of the userpation was an Identity card. This isn't paranoia, it is fact.

      If a government wants me to trust it, I for one will always reply , "Trust but verify!" Even then I will only trust so long as they don't hold the upper hand, for if they do, they are in the position to force me regardless of what I verify.

      This ignorance of how true security is arived at is threatening us with a far greater danger than posed by terrorists like Al Qaeda and I am not depreciating their threat. Already in the USA we see over $1000 billion taken for "Homeland Security" and not a single real action has been taken to actually secure the arrest of known illegal aliens or undesirable ones. There is a shakedown happening all around the world over this terrorism stuff and no security is being forwarded. The verification says that a fraud is being comitted by the governments in question.

      Better ID of persons is of no use in such activities anyway. Only real actions to actually arrest and remove real problems has or ever will work. Substitution of some fact check device like an ID does nothing to identify bad intent or bad behavior.

      --
      Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
    35. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I thought it was just the U.S. that wanted to take people's freedoms and that Europe was some sort of civil rights paradise? Wait, you mean all the Eurofanbois on Slashdot were wrong? Noooo.

    36. Re:so ? by shlaf · · Score: 0
      Personally, I wouldn't care if they collected information, as long as I could trust the government.


      You probably wanted to say a government. I mean, would you trust another government more than the current one? I doubt so...
    37. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And on your little islands you can get arrested and without intervention of a judge be locked away for half a year (which IIRC can be lenghtened if needed). Yeah that is one of your 'anti-terrorism' measures, so I thumb my nose at you from continental Europe.

    38. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This begs the question "is the a free world inside America?"

      Which also begs the question "How are you gentleman?"

    39. Re:so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 years is maybe long time to you. Maybe I live a bit longer. And to me it's not funny to walk down the streets with ALL my personal data (firstname, surname, birthdate, nationalty etc) readable to everyone. Isn't to you?

  3. Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by acebone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Where can I read about biometrics not being safe ?

    That's very interesting, and I've never heard about it before. I mean surely the pattern in your eyes and your fingerprints are unique and does not change, no ?

    --
    Check out my PHP Url Validator
    1. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's very interesting, and I've never heard about it before. I mean surely the pattern in your eyes and your fingerprints are unique and does not change, no ?

      Right. it's like a password that cannot change.

      Then, as soon as someone knows your password, you're fucked. The only thing is at the moment it's a very difficult thing to copy all of someone's biometrics. Some already can be, and many others will in time.

    2. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Frogbert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats the point, your eyes don't change, your fingerprints don't change.

      So as soon as someone has your fingerprint they can just make a fake thumb and be you anywhere they go.

    3. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Sique · · Score: 4, Informative

      Biometrics have a limited recognition rate, that means: a considerable amount of false positives (wrongly identified) or false negatives (wrongly refused). Often all you can do is having a compromise, either admitting the false positives to have less false negatives, or having lots of people wrongly refused by the system, so the human operators have to manually sort out the remainings.

      Due to the limited recognition rate, you can often easily fool a biometric scanner. Face recognition systems are often fooled by holding a picture of the right person before the lense. Same often works for iris scanners. Finger print scanners can be fooled by fake fingerprints made from wax (stearine). Hand scanner sometimes are easiest. Cut out a cardboard with the right hand profile.

      Most of those biometric scanners thus should never run unattended, to minimize manipulation as stated above. And if you have humans watch the scanners, you could as easily have those humans perform the checks themselves, probably getting better recognition rates.

      Biometric scanners may give you additional security, if you use all the common methods like picture ids, signature and similar too, because now an attacker has not only to disguise himself accordingly, but has to fake the biometric data too. But without a central database for crosschecking the data, its rather meaningless. If he can fake a picture ID with his face and a false name, he can also fake the biometric data to fit his own data. As a stand alone tool the biometric scanners are not really ready.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    4. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Yes well by the time u r able to copy sum1's biometrics then the technology will b able 2 tell which is the real 1 and which is the fake 1 so no it doesen't matter in the end it will still b secure.

    5. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by fenodyree · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When I think of Biometric ident usually fingerprints and iris's come to mind. The former is quite simple to fake as shown by gummy bears. The latters complications are discussed here, with methods ranging from simple to replacing an eye or digging one out. It seems the most secure form of ident would be through DNA, however we all know the dangers and benefits associated with cradle to grave tracking.

    6. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by nebulus4 · · Score: 1

      It has been said quite a few times already that biometrics by themself cannot be used as primary authentication. The insecurity lies within the fact that it cannot be changed after it has been spoofed.

      Another problem with the use of biometrics is described here.

      --
      "It would be wrong to refuse to face the fact that everything is fundamentally sick and sad."
    7. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by datajack · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, the technology may be able to change to deal with a new way of fooling the existing tech.

      Let's step back a bit and look at the two things needed for an authentication system...

      1. Input device - the means to input the credentials into the system. These include fingerprint scanners, and keyboards for passwords etc.

      2. Credentials - Fingerprints, passwords, one-time codes etc.

      Traditionally, every outhentication credential can be copied or stolen eventually. So, if someone learns your password or steals your smartcard, then the sysadmin can disable it and issue a new one.
      Who wants to be the first volunteer to be issued with new fingerprints?

      Oh yes, the technology will evolve to be able to detect a new method of faking 'prints, but this will involve replacing or upgrading every authentication terminal in use, a hugely expensive task - a sign of a fundamentally broken idea if you ask me.

    8. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by nzgeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is only one of you. You have one set of fingerprints and one set of unique retinal patterns.

      If someone manages to compromise this, say by lifting one of your prints off a discarded coke can, or removing one of your eyeballs, then you're - as the kids say - 0wned.

      Sure biometrics may be mildly harder to compromise than a password, but a password is a hell of a lot easier to revoke if it has been compromised.

    9. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by sql*kitten · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I mean surely the pattern in your eyes and your fingerprints are unique and does not change, no ?

      That's the problem, if an attacker can bypass the sensor and feed data directly into the recognition engine (which can be as simple as splicing a few cables) all he needs is a copy of your biometric data (which he can get from doing the same thing to any sensor you use) and he can present your authentication credentials anywhere that biometrics are used.

      If your credit card or passport is stolen, it can be blocked and a new one issued. If you lose your PIN number, you can have it reset. If an identity thief obtains scans of your fingerprints, retina, etc, then you're stuck - no way to replace 'em, see.

      And THAT is why biometrics are stupid - once compromised, they're compromised for good. Present-day systems are based on matching something you have (your card) with something you know (the PIN) to prove you are who you say you are. You can also have a system based on something you are (say your fingerprint) and something you know (a PIN). But relying on a system that is wholly something you are is so stupid it's just embarassing.

    10. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      But for ID cards, I'd expect a central database to contain all the info on that card (I'd be surprised if for current ID cards there wasn't a central database, which would just have to get a few more fields).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    11. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by R.Caley · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Can't say about retinal or iris patterns, but fingerprints are so dodgy, even when compared by experts, that the US government felt the need to ban funding of any study into how reliable they are. (New Scientist report).

      I think we can assume that if they thought the results of such a study would be positive they would be pouring money at it, in the hope of being able ditch that embarassing `images are very like themselves' study.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    12. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by ravydavygravy · · Score: 1

      As a stand alone tool the biometric scanners are not really ready

      That I think is the big gotcha - they are not ready yet - as these technologies improve, and as more money is poured into these kinds of research, we will see marked improvements in these systems...

    13. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Type like an idiot, assume you are an idiot.

    14. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by ravydavygravy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      ... can I add the now? (doh!)

    15. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So as soon as someone has your fingerprint they can just make a fake thumb and be you anywhere they go.

      Wouldn't they need to make a fake finger instead?

    16. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PIN number

      Aargh!

    17. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Sique · · Score: 1

      Currently the situation is this: Most biometric scanners are not used to improve security, but to increase throughput for check points, so less human work is necessary. If biometrics improve, so will sink the number of humans working at checkpoints, thus allowing more manipulating of the scanner. To me it looks as if there is something like an accepted level of error, and this one seems to be quite independent from the used technology. So from a security point of view, even sophisticated biometrics with much better recognition wont improve security at all, because it is just used to lower security costs by slashing jobs.

      So your privacy gets invaded without giving you heightened security in return. Thats the real big gotcha here.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    18. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by CoryS0L0 · · Score: 1

      The problem really isn't the security of the biometric being comprimised. Fingerprints, iris scans, etc.. are all inherintly BAD biometrics. The 1st aspect of a biometric is uniqueness. The 2nd, usually overlooked, aspect is LIVELINESS. Anyone can cutt of a finger or an eyeball and use it to circumvent biometric tests... The industry is still waiting for the next big biometric that fullfills both the unique and liveliness qualities of a truly useful biometric. Besides, biometrics should never be used on there own, rather they should be used as a locking mechanism for a secret key of some sort.

    19. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Well, the problem with fingerprint readers is that you leave your password on aything you touch.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    20. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your fingerprints change throughout your life (scars, anyone?), and there are jobs that are so tough on the fingers that there are rarely any prints to be found.

      You are taller in the morning than in the evening, and the size of you feet changes during the day as well, as does eventual puffiness of the face.

      There are many more examples like this (I think I picked them up during a previous /. megathread on the eeevil of biometrics), but summing up: at any time, you will have to check 10% of people manually anyway.

    21. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by panoplos · · Score: 2, Informative

      While all the points you mentioned are valid concerns, especially False Acceptance Rate (FAR) & False Rejection Rate (FRR), there is technology that overcomes most of these limitations.

      Have a look at AuthenTec's TruePrint Technology. In summary, "TruePrint Technology uses a patented radio frequency (RF) imaging technique that allows the sensor to generate an image of the shape of the live layer of the skin that is buried beneath the surface of the finger." This makes spoofing of fingerprints nearly impossible.

      In fact, AuthenTec are quickly dispelling the myth that biometrics are inherently insecure. Have a look at the Fujitsu's hot-off-the-factory-line F900iC [Japanese]. This is the first phone to fully encorporate mobile commerce (m-commerce), and all authentication is performed via that tiny AES2510 AuthenTec swipe sensor.

      DoCoMo (think: user base in the millions) would be mad to trust a technology that you suggest is "not really ready."

      And yes, I work for AuthenTec ;-).

    22. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by Sique · · Score: 1

      This phone actually uses several layers of authentication: First: The authentication is tied to the SIM card or a similar ID inside the phone. Second: The phone itself is protected by a PIN, so not everyone can use it. And then there is the third layer, the finger printing.

      All together create a quite high security, because it checks for three different things: 1) Something the user possesses (the phone with the right ID), 2) Something the user knows (the PIN to activate the phone) and 3) something the user is (her fingerprint). I doubt you can use the m-commerce feature by just lending the phone of someone else and sending your finger print out.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    23. Re:Info on Biometrics not being safe ? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      What if Wesley Snipes pulls out your eye and sticks it in front of the scanner?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  4. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by chimpo13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sure they are protective. This was probably put to them in A Good Way. It's doing THEM a favor. No point in carrying cash, when you have credit cards which are protected even if stolen.

    Take it to your own level of whether this is good or bad. I'm sure the comment arguments have already started.

  5. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I think you mean Estonia was in the USSR.

  6. Sweeping statement by ItsIllak · · Score: 2, Insightful
    (Security gurus of course know: biometrics just don't work.)

    They do? There are plenty of viable biometric measurements out there. They are not 100% reliable, but when compared to wetware trying to remember passwords they stack up pretty well.

    I for instance have a finger print reader on both my palmtop and my desktop. In the limited environment I have, they identify and authorize perfectly well.

    1. Re:Sweeping statement by Znork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I for instance have a finger print reader on both my palmtop and my desktop."

      And everyone else, for instance, has access to your fingerprints on every object you've touched in recent time.

      Or are you using gloves?

    2. Re:Sweeping statement by slothman32 · · Score: 1

      Such as the keys on his keyboards. I am wondering what kind of data he has that he wants all that. Unless it is free or he is testing it. I have all kinds of weird data, though most harmless, on my PC. AFAIK noone has hacked or virused is away.

      --
      Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
    3. Re:Sweeping statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And everyone else, for instance, has access to your fingerprints on every object you've touched in recent time.


      Yes, and on top of this not only do they have the OP's fingerprint, they can't change their fingerprints.

      Unless they use fake fingerprints in their own biometric reader, in which case the fake fingerprint is just something you carry around to identify you, and may as well be a keycard with a 1024bit key on it, or something

      (probably way less bits, given the accuracy of fingerprint scanners)

    4. Re:Sweeping statement by ItsIllak · · Score: 1

      Indeed, there are copies of my fingerprints all around. However, once you loose physical security, you loose security anyway.

      Also, if someone has the resources to fabricate fingerprints that will fool the reader, I don't think there's going to be a whole lot I can do about it. Almost all security is simply a means of raising the cost of hacking it to a level above it's value.

    5. Re:Sweeping statement by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 4, Funny

      Almost all security is simply a means of raising the cost of hacking it to a level above it's value.

      You are completely correct, and I have implemented a cunning plan that has made the effort of hacking me not worth doing.

      I have no life, no job, no financial prospects and no worth to my identity. I plan to soon get a criminal record and become a terror suspect. Eventually I will also return my internet connection to a 2400bps modem, and will be insanely secure, as there will be no worth in breaking my security

      Take that, evil hackers of the world, TAKE THAT!

    6. Re:Sweeping statement by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "And everyone else, for instance, has access to your fingerprints on every object you've touched in recent time."

      How does one go about making use of those finger prints, and how hard would it really be to make a system that defends against false readings?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:Sweeping statement by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Indeed, there are copies of my fingerprints all around. However, once you loose physical security, you loose security anyway.

      So there is no point in having the identification hardware in the first place.

      if someone has the resources to fabricate fingerprints that will fool the reader,[...]

      IIRC, this consists of a small quantity of gelatine.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    8. Re:Sweeping statement by Alsee · · Score: 3, Informative

      the resources to fabricate fingerprints that will fool the reader...
      Almost all security is simply a means of raising the cost of hacking it to a level above it's value.


      It has been well established that cost and resources involved in defeating a fingerprint scanner amount to little more than some gummi bears.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    9. Re:Sweeping statement by Alsee · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How does one go about making use of those finger prints

      Google knows all.

      how hard would it really be to make a system that defends against false readings?

      Apparently very hard. It seems that all commonly available scanners are easily defeated by Gummi Bears.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    10. Re:Sweeping statement by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, with a criminal record and being terror suspect, I guess there are some agencies which would be very interested in breaking your security.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    11. Re:Sweeping statement by Znork · · Score: 1

      "How does one go about making use of those finger prints"

      Photoetching can be used to create molds, for example, either to fake fingers or finger covers.

      Of course, you can defend against such forgeries by measuring things like skin conductivity and temperature, but those are even easier to fake than the actual print.

      Fingerprints, like most biometrics, are just not that difficult to copy. Compare it the protection against forgery we have in currency, and the protection of being a pattern of ridges on a leathery material appears to be woefully insufficient.

    12. Re:Sweeping statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, with a criminal record and being terror suspect, I guess there are some agencies which would decide the easiest way to break his security would be to break his balls.

    13. Re:Sweeping statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently faking finger prints is relatively easy, but if you can't do that, another option is to open the fingerprint scanner and connect the data cables of the scanner to your laptop. This takes more work, but the thief only needs to succeed once... and they could do it any day. As has been noted many times, you cannot change your biometric password, and you cannot know how many people already know it.

    14. Re:Sweeping statement by CaptainCheese · · Score: 1

      Biometric security readers are a bad idea for anything that people would really want to steal, as the simplest cheapest option is not to clone you retinal pattern or fingerprint. Fit a retinal scanner to ATMs and anyone who's serious about robbing you will have to rob you of your card and your eyes, the same rule applies ot a finger or palmprint scanner.

      Why bother copying the key when you can take it?

      I, for one, can imagine junkies doing this, and the only possible biometric system to get around this would be impossibly complex. an MRI that checks your internal organs are all exactly right coupled with a vocal stress ananlysis test that asks you random questions...

      --
      -- .sigs are a waste of data...turn them off...
    15. Re:Sweeping statement by the+chao+goes+mu · · Score: 1

      The greatest problem is that once your fingerprints have been duplicated by someone, you can't repudiate the prints and issue yourself new ones. The same holds for all biometrics.

      --
      Boys from the City. Not yet caught by the Whirlwind of Progress. Feed soda pop to the thirsty pigs.
    16. Re:Sweeping statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost all security is simply a means of raising the cost of hacking it to a level above it's value.

      And how much does it cost to read a password out of somebody's head?

    17. Re:Sweeping statement by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Right now they need to steal my card and my password. Easiest way to do this is to put a gun to my head, I'll then happily give it to them. Easiest way to take my eyes is to put a gun to my head, and tell me to walk to the machine. Biometrics provided no additional security against small time thiefs, and provides significantly less against true hackers (since once they get them, you can't change your fingerprints/retinal scan).

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  7. pardon my ignorance, but by v1x · · Score: 3, Informative

    Admittedly, I dont know too much about the Estonian political system etc, to comment on the issue of choice, and how much of it the people there had when their government decided to introduce such a thing. However, it has been my experience that outside the US, a lot of cultures dont seem to make that big a deal about privacy, so maybe it is not that big a deal after all to Estonian citizens.

    OTOH, RFIDs have already been implemented by clubs, etc to have painless billing, etc, so there are at least a few people around the world who dont think they are that big a deal.

    Living in the US, however, my own fears are based on what I have heard about the privacy issues surrounding such technology, in that anyone with a scanner can find out a dangerous amount of information about you without your knowledge or consent; so to me it seems like a bad idea at least until someone can manage to convince me otherwise about how my information will be protected.

    1. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by pe1rxq · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually outside the US privacy laws are often a lot stricter.....

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    2. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by Dionysus · · Score: 1

      Might be true in western Europe, but I don't think that's generally true. And even then, from what I remember, US companies are actually better at keeping privacy data private than European companies are (marked forces are stronger in the US than in Europe).

      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
    3. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by bvdbos · · Score: 0
      I can only speak for Holland, but there's almost no public debate regarding privacy issues over here. The only ones making a real issue out of it are the people which are on the internet a lot (and are probably reading /. too). There's one active organisation, bits of freedom on digital rights, but that's it. Our governement wants to establish a new intelligence agency which gets the right to snoop on everyboduy they want, even if they're not suspects. Also another bill states that ISP's should keep track of all mail- and surfingtraffic for a year (Nobody knows how to do this yet...). Both aren't established yet, but will be in a year if we don't take care.

      Also there's a famous beach-club who offers an option to implement RFID's under the skin to be able to pay at the bar and get faster entrance!!! That's a way to change the public opinion about RFID's...

    4. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by isorox · · Score: 1

      We use RFIDs at work for all sorts of access. To get in the building, and secure areas (newsroom, apps rooms etc) all have RFID pads.

    5. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      I hope your not talking about hacked servers and creditcard theft?
      Actually I haven't heard of one significant case in Europe where private data was distributed but by all means; proof me wrong!

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    6. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can only speak for Holland, but there's almost no public debate regarding privacy issues over here

      Maybe not in Holland, but what about the other parts of the Netherlands?

    7. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by canavan · · Score: 1

      As long as your "privacy" is based on "opt-out", you don't have any. Wake me up when the US changes their data protection laws to "opt-in".

    8. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by bvdbos · · Score: 0

      I've just been on holiday abroad and noticed (and knew before of course) that for almost all foreigners Holland equals The Netherlands. I myself am not from Holland but from North Brabant in The Netherlands:=)

    9. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. In the English language, Holland has become a synonym for the Netherlands. You Dutch has better learn to deal with it.

    10. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by pjt33 · · Score: 1
      Might be true in western Europe, but I don't think that's generally true.
      It's true in the EU as a whole. That's 25 European countries now.
    11. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, it might help that most of the credit card companies are US companies to begin with.

    12. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by flex941 · · Score: 1

      Not only in English. In Estonian the Netherlands is called Holland too. No other word for them actually.

    13. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by Dionysus · · Score: 1

      I hope your not talking about hacked servers and creditcard theft?

      No, I'm talking about having policies in place to keep data private.

      There was an European survey about six months ago or so, where they found out that even though the US laws are more lax, the US companies where generally better than their European counterparts.

      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
    14. Re:pardon my ignorance, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are also stupid politicians (you don't have a monopoly there), terrorists and generally greedy bastards outside the United States, so don't count on it remaining that way.

  8. Re:FP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    w00t! I got it! You fail!

    Too bad you're not on Slashdot High-Speed Internet. Maybe you would have got it then ;)

  9. Cool by c0dedude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This could have some nifty scientific uses even if you can't decrypt the data. Just think of the sociological experiments. Knowing exactly who's on what road, when? Who shops where? The possiblities are mind-blowing. And the sample would be great because it's taken from the public.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    1. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... The marketing types would just love that...

  10. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by nebulus4 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Estonia actually WAS in Soviet Russia

    It's a common mistake to refer to Soviet as Soviet Russia... Russia was a part of the Soviet Union same way as Estonia, so, saying what you actually did doesn't make any sence ;)

    --
    "It would be wrong to refuse to face the fact that everything is fundamentally sick and sad."
  11. RFID? by excessive · · Score: 1
    Contactless smartcards have been around for a while. I've got one in my wallet. (Although the one I have has no biometrics and nothing fancy on it)

    They use RF to power the device up and then communicate with it. Been about since I've been at university and I've had about 5 1/2 years worth of job.

    1. Re:RFID? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contactless smartcards have been around for a while

      Correct. My car ,a Renault Megane, even uses one instead of a key.

  12. Broken by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A good ID verifying-device (card, token, whatever):

    * Does not contain or rely on biometrics. Generally can change, and once copied/forged one can never change the identifying information.

    * Is capable of doing public-key encryption on-card. The information that identifies the person never leaks to the device. (Technically, this can be done with symmetric encryption as well in conjunction with a trusted centralized server, but this has some drawbacks.)

    * Has a PIN, so that stealing the card is not sufficient to impersonate a person.

    * Has a PIN entry keypad *on-card*, so that false readers and bogus ATMs cannot steal PINs.

    * If any data must go back to the card owner, has a rudimentary display *on-card* (say, a calculator-style LCD display), so that a false reader or bogus ATM cannot say that someone is paying "$10.00 to WalMart" for something and actually having them pay "$14.00 to Joe Hacker".

    * Should support a scheme where personal identity is not disclosed, but a persona is (my "persona" at the moment is "0x0d0a"). This is because any national ID card will naturally be used by other systems as well, and without this step, severe privacy abuses will occur. This requires use of a trusted, centralized server or of a card that can natively store multiple identities.

    * Allows one to disable the trusted nature of the the card quickly and easily if it is lost, and in a manner that cannot be easily done by others (which would allow a denial-of-service attack against the card owner).

    * Can handle water, crushing force, and high temperature.

    * Can fit in a wallet.

    * Should have the ability to log identity verification usage, so that the user can sync his card up with a computer or similar and check to see what he actually signed off on two days ago.

    This certainly isn't a complete list of desireable characteristics, but it's a start.

    1. Re:Broken by Beautyon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      is a system that relies on a mix of documents that you choose to provide, and not something provided to you by the state, no matter how cool it is.

      Estonians, dont whine about ID cards; do what the Australians did and refuse to carry them at all.

      Your government will withdraw the scheme. Guaranteed.

      --
      ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
    2. Re:Broken by Serious+Simon · · Score: 2, Insightful
      A good ID verifying-device (card, token, whatever): * Does not contain or rely on biometrics.

      If it contains NO biometrics at all, it becomes very difficult to make sure the ID actually matches the person presenting it. Imagine a passport without a photo or any other biometrics...

    3. Re:Broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your government will withdraw the scheme. Guaranteed.

      I dunno.... Think of all the privacy^H^H^H^H^H^H^H terror they can fight with these.

    4. Re:Broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      PIN-entry on card. Right. Like my ATM is going to believe your card when it says you have the PIN. That's like rsh, except with money. You go first.

      I'm also wondering how I'm going to send someone payment without sending them personal information. Is your card storing money, because I'm all for electronic cash. I don't think combining cash with an ID card is a good idea though. Kind of defeats the purpose of cash.

      And for the life of me I don't see why biometrics couldn't be used in conjunction with other ID methods for enhanced security. Yes, if someone stole my PIN and my card and my iris scan, they could impersonate me. That's still one more step than today when they just need my card and PIN. Both the card and PIN can still be changed/deactived, which makes having my iris scan useless. I understand that biometrics alone is a bad plan, just I don't see how biometrics + password + device is worse that what we're using now, and I do see how it could say, prevent unauthorized credit card use.

    5. Re:Broken by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Interesting

      PIN-entry on card. Right. Like my ATM is going to believe your card when it says you have the PIN. That's like rsh, except with money. You go first.

      In smartcard-like systems (which differ from credit card systems), the PIN is not for the benefit of the ATM -- the smartcard would *never* hand over a PIN if it could get it directly from the user. As soon as you enter a PIN in smartcard, the ATM hands off the PIN to the smartcard and then is supposed to promptly "forget" about the PIN. The PIN is just what tells the smartcard that it should sign/endorse/do whatever the ATM hands to it. Generally, smartcards disable themselves if they get several bogus PINs in a row, as a matter of fact. The only reason for putting the buttons on the machine is that it reduces the unit cost of the card and lets you put buttons with nice texture and feedback.

      As a matter of fact, cell phones could already provide much of this functionality onboard (though cell companies would be *certain* to want to route purchases through their own networks and take a cut, rather than just using IrDA or similar to talk directly to the ATM), and the FBI would be sure to want the phone to broadcast where you're using it and the like. Sigh.

      I'm also wondering how I'm going to send someone payment without sending them personal information.

      You don't. Your card-issuer (or a proxy, if there's any interest from card-issuers in providing anonymized transactions, which I'm guessing there won't be. :-(

      Here's the data that goes back and forth in such a system:

      1) You stick card into reader. Reader provides power, card powers itself on.

      2) You enter PIN. Card notices that PIN is really yours and decides that "you are you", and allows you to authorize things.

      3) ATM sends "WalMart, $55.95" to the card.

      4) The card displays "WalMart, $55.95 on its display".

      5) You hit "okay" on the card (probably doubles as one of the number buttons).

      6) The card signs the following tuple ("12529134131", "WalMart, $55.95, 3451", where "3451" is an internal counter to the card that is incremented each use -- this prevents replay attacks, much like the serial number on a check), and sends it back to the reader. "12529134131" is a number that identifies you. Note that this can be anything, which is why such a system allows disconnecting personal information from your identity that WalMart can see. You could have just one, as debit card/credit cards currently have. You could have a number of "personas" on card that you hit a number to choose between. You could have a large store of one-time-use, pre-approved numbers on the card that are just moved through, one by one. This prevents Wal-Mart from tracking you, but gives them an identifier that whoever is holding your account (probably your card vendor or a proxy) knows maps to "you".

      7) If you have the required money, the account-holding-server can return a response containing a tuple of "authorized" and all the data that they were previously sent (this prevents attacking transmission lines to ATMs and sending bogus "authorized" responses) signed with their *own* private key.

      8) The reader checks, decides that the response is good, and gives you a recepit.

      If anything, this is *easier* to use than a credit card, because the interface on a given, hell, I dunno what to call a button-and-display-enabled smartcard...(say, "brilliant card", in the vein of the "smart rocks"/"brilliant pebbles" anti-ICBM defense), brilliant card, is the same each time. With a card reader, the user has to figure out something different each time.

      And for the life of me I don't see why biometrics couldn't be used in conjunction with other ID methods for enhanced security.

      In theory, they could, as long as all ATMs/readers *strictly* never trusted biometrics alone, and required a second, strong form of authentication. There are two main drawbacks: (1) this destroys any possible vestig

    6. Re:Broken by Llywelyn · · Score: 1

      * Does not contain or rely on biometrics. Generally can change, and once copied/forged one can never change the identifying information.

      As someone else point out, it would be a pretty poor passport or drivers license that didn't have a photo on it. That's a biometric identification.

      Your credit cards have a place for your signature on the back. *That's* a biometric identification as well.

      Remember, two out of three is minimal for good security: Something you have, something you are, something you know. Sure, I would never use a retinal scanner or fingerprint reader by itself or in combination with another form of biometric, but combine it with a card or a password and we are getting somewhere--particularly if we have a guard standing there to watch for shenanigans.

      What security experts object to is treating the biometric as a silver bullet, not in the use of biometrics in and of themselves.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    7. Re:Broken by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      You're right. I apologize.

      I should have said "computer-readable biometric".

      The problem comes in when we require a reader for whatever biometric data you're using and a malicious reader can swipe it.

  13. Biometrics DO work, when used appropriately by leereyno · · Score: 2, Informative

    People just don't understand what biometrics are for. They are not appropriate as a primary means of verifying identity, but they do work well as a supplement to other methods.

    I think the problem is you've got some sales monkeys who are selling the idea of biometrics as an authentication pancea to pointy-haired types, which is just further proof that non-technical people should never be in a position of authority or act in a primary decision making capacity where technology is concerned.

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    1. Re:Biometrics DO work, when used appropriately by Mr.+No+Skills · · Score: 1
      Thank you. It's just a type of lock, and any lock can be defeated if you're willing to work at it. They're more about convenience for the "unlocker" than they are about identifying the person.

      All the discussion about gummy bears and digging out eye-balls makes me laugh. Most secure installations I've been around have a guard standing next to the biometric device to prevent any manipulation of the device in an unusual way. I think the only time I've seen unattended biometrics has been at Black Mesa, and we all know where that went!

      --
      Sleep is for the Weak
  14. RFID or contactless? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't read the article, but are you sure it's talking about RFID? Contactless smartcards are different to RFID tags. Maybe the paranoia's well founded, but there is a very important difference between an application card which can be pressed to a reader rather than inserted, and a tag which is designed to be tracked from several feet away.
    Which is this?

  15. A manageable situation by OffTheLip · · Score: 1

    Estonia is relatively small in size and population. With the exception of Tallinn and a couple other cities it's also very rural. RFID is manageable there. Plus, it might help if you get lost in the heavy forests and start treking toward the Soviet border. 1991 wasn't that long ago and many Estonians don't want to go there...

    1. Re:A manageable situation by nebulus4 · · Score: 1

      Plus, it might help if you get lost in the heavy forests and start treking toward the Soviet border.

      In this case you should press the RETURN button on your time travelling device and go back to 2004 as there's no Soviet today ;)

      --
      "It would be wrong to refuse to face the fact that everything is fundamentally sick and sad."
    2. Re:A manageable situation by bvdbos · · Score: 1, Informative

      RFID can be used if you get lost? The range of RFID is about 2 meters most afaik...

  16. Mmmm... Possibilities :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I dont't think, it's too hard to format this lil' pecker and rewrite the data, when the specific card readers/writers become aviable. Since it's contactless, U don't have to show the real pic on the card anyway.

    And about this GSM-tracking? I'd like to whack that bastard who came up with the idea to bring this to the public. It's pretty dawm hard to give your girlfriend impression you're doing overtime @work, when your phone puts you in the strip-club.

    GSM-LocatorSimple.

    1. Re:Mmmm... Possibilities :) by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      Unless you have the equipment or a good friend in the phone company you cant track phone without the permission of the owner, unless some country has decided is a free-for-all. even so it brings up the old "Well if you have nothing to hide, why not let me track your phone??" which can be countered by the increasingly needed "Because i believe in a free and fair society where we are deemed innocent until prooven guilty and where we are resonably free from privacy invasion. It is my feeling that such a breach of privacy as you have suggested would be far more intrusive to me than it would provide you with peice of mind."

      But really there needs to be more done to stop this being abused - maybe restrict tracking only if a missing-person has been filed.

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    2. Re:Mmmm... Possibilities :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually,You dontneed a friend in Telecom to track someones phone. You just have to get a hold on the victims phone for a few seconds. couple of SMS orders for authorisation codes and ready to rock.

  17. Why RFID? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

    Why is everything RFID, and why is it suddenly a privacy issue. Don't bother answering that question, please.

    Smartcards like this are usually contactless in that they can be at most several millimetres away from the reader (The power levels achieved typically allow only a very small separation (a few millimeters) between the card and the reader.)

    I guess that They can increase the power signal until a satellite can read it, but AFAIK if they can do that, privacy issues are the least of my worries.

    1. Re:Why RFID? by thelexx · · Score: 1

      "at most several millimetres away from the reader (The power levels achieved typically allow only a very small separation (a few millimeters) between the card and the reader.)"

      Wrong. The ones at my work can read cards 12"+ away from the pad.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    2. Re:Why RFID? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Wrong. well good for you, you have an RFID-style vicinity card that you use.

      I lifted that quote straight from a manufacturer's website, you'd think they know the operating characteristics of their cards now wouldn't you?

      In any case, there are different types of cards, ranging from ones you have to touch to the pad (close-coupled cards) to ones that operate a small distance away (proximity cards) and ones like you have, (vicinity cards) not to mention real RFID tags. It makes a big difference on the application depending on which type you have, and the only one that raises any the spooks-are-watching-us concerns are the ones like you have. Most cards are the close-coupled ones.

  18. Isn't Estonia by rf0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    where Dilbert always goes on business trips?

    Rus

    1. Re:Isn't Estonia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The country Dilbert always goes to is Elbonia.

    2. Re:Isn't Estonia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elbonia?

  19. Some Considerations by Trailwalker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Estonia has a large non citizen population, mostly resettled Russian nationals. There are serious questions about who is a citizen and who isn't.

    This, and other problems that arose from the long term Soviet occupation make a secure method on identification necessary.

    Under their circumstances, the Estonian Government believes security is more important than privacy.

    1. Re:Some Considerations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They are de facto Russian citizens mostly with old USSR passports who either refuse to accept Estonian citizenship because it would hinder their ability to visit Russia, or are just too chauvinistic to pass the citizenship exams (i.e. learn the local language). Or both. Or, with luck, neither.

    2. Re:Some Considerations by TheProcrastinatorTM · · Score: 1

      Given that Estonian is considered to be one of the hardest languages in the world (or anyways Europe; Estonian, like Finnish, is a finno-ugric language, not indo-european) to learn, it is not surprising Russians have trouble passing language exams for citizenship tests.

    3. Re:Some Considerations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is not entirely true. Read Kalevi Wiik (http://www.lib.helsinki.fi/bff/399/wiik.html) or Ago Künnap (http://www.ut.ee/Ural/kynnap/kpls.html) for historic background. It is quite conceivable that much of the Europeans (and even more of the anglo-saxon origin) had ancestors who spoke a language similar to Finno-Ugric languages. You (indo-european speaking population) have forgotten your past, get it back while you still can. Finnish and Estonian languages are phonetically very simple and computational linguistics has shown them to be simple as well. Blame learning or teaching not the language.

    4. Re:Some Considerations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even more so, Estonians are goot at picking up other languages with very little accent. That is probably the cause why so many finno-ugric people have switched to other languages during the past. And maybe one should REALLY blame other hard-to-speak languages that fck up the speakers mind so bad that they can't learn other languages any more.

    5. Re:Some Considerations by TheProcrastinatorTM · · Score: 1

      I don't recall if I was aware of that theory or not. I do know that Latvian and Lithuanian are considered to be the two most conservative languages of the european half of indo-european languages, just to throw some more trivia in.

      However, I must say that that still does not change anything I said since 1) Languages are not genetic; just because my ancestors knew it doesn't help me if I learned only an indo-european language and 2) Phonetics is only a small part of the language, it is the grammar I believe that is the largest part of the problem (and is usually what trips people up). [I am not sure the part about computational linguistics, so maybe there is something to that, but I cannot comment, except to say that we are not talking about the simplicity of the language, but rather the ability of people, conditioned to speak indo-european languages, to learn it, which are not the same thing.]

      [P.S. Speaking as an American, I have no intention of pursuing my Finno-Ugric roots since that is meaningless in a culture where we are all mongrels. (And, by the way a decent portion of those Indo-European speakers in my country are not of European origin, so that would be truly silly for them.)]

    6. Re:Some Considerations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an American and native English speaker and I studied Estonian for less than half a year and I speak it better than most Russians here (in Estonia). It's difficult to figure out the grammar, but once you learn it, it's not so bad.

    7. Re:Some Considerations by TheProcrastinatorTM · · Score: 1

      > Blame learning or teaching not the language.

      Eh, I guess I see what you are saying now. Just because us i-e speaking types with it does not make it hard. Okay, i will give you that as reasonable. I probably should have stated the problem better though, since the difficulty of Estonian itself was not really the issue.

  20. Why assume RFID by R.Caley · · Score: 1
    I have a smart card which is a 12 month unlimited bus pass (and so worth more than my PDA now I come to think of it).

    This is contactless, in the sense that it is read by just being placed on top of a box on the bus. I doubt it can be read from further away (or they'd just put detectors in the door and speed up the queue).

    Luckily they use a worthwhile biometric for identification. There is a photo on the card and a human being looking at it.

    --
    _O_
    .|<
    The named which can be named is not the true named
    1. Re:Why assume RFID by DrPizza · · Score: 1

      I presume you're talking about Oyster cards, and Oyster cards are RFID (the chips are from Philips, called "MIFARE"). The readers used for Oyster cards are limited to a fairly short range (so you've gotta put the card quite close to the reader) but that's a configurable parameter.

      The reason they don't make the range longer is probably because it'd be too inconvenient; particularly for users of pay-as-you-go Oysters. They might find themselves being billed for journeys just from having a bus pass too near them (or from walking too close to a tube gate).

    2. Re:Why assume RFID by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      I presume you're talking about Oyster cards[...]

      God no! That would mean I lived in (shudder) London.

      I don't know what technology the Lothian ones are based on, I had assuemd they were not `RFID' mostly because they predate my being aware of RFID as a technology, and the very short range. Probably I have the wrong end of the `RFID' stick, as to what the term covers. I understood it to be a standard for low-capacity, wireless scanning (ie what you need to replace barcodes) and distinct from standards for smarter things (such as the ITSO transport smartcard standard).

      Does anyone know of an overview so I can get my acronyms sorted out?

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    3. Re:Why assume RFID by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      Where else would a bus pass be more expensive than a PDA? Dont forget that a wireless system designed for 10cm could potentially be hacked to 10m, people who use any sort of wireless device in their projects have to remember this and i dont think they are.

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    4. Re:Why assume RFID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're RFID I've developed a system like 5 yrs ago, but back then they called them transponders (RFID it's just a buzzword)

    5. Re:Why assume RFID by DrPizza · · Score: 1

      I think they're RFID too. But I don't know how one qualifies as RFID. It could be completely arbitrary for all I know.

      And there are worse things than living in London. Living in Edinburgh, for example.

  21. Money by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

    How's Estonia, a poor country, funding all this? Money from the EU? Is it being used as a testing ground for rolling out the same scheme in Western Europe?

    1. Re:Money by Sanity · · Score: 1
      How's Estonia, a poor country, funding all this?
      Not that poor, Estonia has really embraced communications technology over the past few years, to the point that it is now one of the more wired countries in the EU.
    2. Re:Money by admbws · · Score: 1

      Estonia's governmental projects are actually efficient, unlike in certain Western Europe nations where money for projects like this are squandered on bureaucracy and contractors going tits-up before completion.

  22. Circumventing the technology. by hashwolf · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tinfoil hat wearers might try the following method:

    1) Fry the electronics in the card by putting it in a microwave oven etc.

    2) Report the card as lost and get a new working card.

    You can then keep the working card wrapped in tinfoil and use it only when you really need its identification technology.
    Otherwise use the card with the disabled electronics as you would use a 'normal' ID card.

    --
    - "They misunderestimated me."
  23. Stop Complaining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Due to Estonia's 'high tech' miracle you have DVD players, televisions, kitchen appliances, high density housing and all the conveniences of modern living. So what if you had to give up a few freedoms along the way?

    At least that is what your leaders would like to have you think.

  24. RFID == bad?? by standsolid · · Score: 1

    this can't be shaping up to be all that bad now, could it?

    --
    WTPOUAWYHTTOTWPA
    What's the point of using acronyms when you have to type out the whole phrase anyways?
  25. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by nebulus4 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You're right.. but I've never said it was a big mistake. All I said was that it was a common mistake.

    Anyhow, the chances of new russian invation are the same as the chances the next US president will be an alien :) So, I think there should be serious privacy concerns.

    And the last thing... historically speaking the country behind the Great Russia actually is Ukraine.

    --
    "It would be wrong to refuse to face the fact that everything is fundamentally sick and sad."
  26. Re:Make yourself somebody important by mwvdlee · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I wouldn't mod it as "funny", I'd mod it "off-topic"... What are you talking about???

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  27. Excellent news! by vilms · · Score: 0, Troll

    I often lose my Estonian. This will be a boon to me and many others who frequently suffer that particular embarrassment.

  28. RF proof wallet by pbjones · · Score: 1

    just keep your card in an RF proof wallet, then YOU choose when to give away any details.

    --
    There was an unknown error in the submission.
  29. About actual Estonian ID card ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... its their homepage in English

    http://www.id.ee/pages.php/0303

    Märten

  30. Why not place RFID on Driver's Licenses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We already have Driver's Licenses and State ID's in the US; Why not simply take those and add RFID tags to them? Otherwise this is simply another addition to an already bulky wallet filled with Credit Cards, Health Insurance Cards, Travel Cards - oh, and some ca$h too.

  31. Sounds like there will be a market for... by The+Fanta+Menace · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...Faraday-cage id card wallets

    --
    -- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
  32. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... then they will know also that rfid or _ANYTHING_ ELSE TECHNOLOGICAL "TRACKING" has very little to do with being a police state or not(rfid is just a number anyways that just happens to be readable wirelessly).

    being a DDR like hellhole is a _social_ _people_ problem, not something that just spurs out of technology. you cold have a super invasive super bitchy governing system with just people and hard sticks.

    besides than this I would bet these id cards to be similar to bus cards, that you would have to place them in a reader anyways(no 'secret' reading). the id cards would probably have the same stuff in them that finland has in it's new electronic cards that allows for digitally signing some papers & etc, allowing you to file some papers through the net.

    besides, they won't probably be mandatory to hurle around just to get to the next city. you would be surprised how much the store clerk at your local neighbourhood grocery store remembers about you as well...

    the cold hard fact is that information _will_ be gathered about you, it's what the goverment(or other organizations with power) does with that information that matters... but this is nothing new. information was always gatherable about anyone(hell, even usa has long tradition about gathering information about labour activists through private detectives and using that to.. umm. well - kill them.), in ddr they could just ask the kids if they wanted dirt on a family(or just made it up).

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  33. You know when.. by T-Kir · · Score: 1

    ..you read too much Dilbert, I initially read Estonia as Elbonia. :-)

    --
    Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
  34. The problems of Biometrics by jetmarc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Once you detect fraud being done with your biometric identity,
    where can you revoke your fingerprint and have a new one issued?

    1. Re:The problems of Biometrics by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      just cut off the affected finger :)

    2. Re:The problems of Biometrics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same place you go to get your eyes replaced when your retinal pattern is stolen.

  35. Ummm, you hate privacy? by Joe+'Nova' · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before this gets labeled flamebait, this kind of intrusion really pisses me off.
    The problem with this technology is it not only tracks you, it will allow tracking of your activities. What you buy. Where you go. The ability to, for good or bad, compile a docier on your life.
    The only thing preventing this from happening before was the sheer logistics of it. Now that its real, I would like to wake people out of slumber.
    I mentioned the ability to do good. I might even call them selling point excuses:
    Tailored ads. Stand in front of a Coke machine with reader-"Mr. Jones, you like Cherry Coke! It's been a while since you've had one! Go ahead-we won't tell the Other cola co.!" This ad is beamed into your head(REAL technology-trial balloon tested in Japan!)-another distraction. If they are powerful enough readers, billboards changes to emphasize something in area based on your personal tastes.
    Use for convenience. Make it a feature before it becomes mandatory.
    For inventory/shipping control. Box 'a' has XXX going to YYY. You don't even need to scan for it directly.

    Look folks, Walmart is forcing the use of tags on all their products. If the reader can read your RFID, it can read those too. Instant knowledge base of all the things you do, what you buy, or don't. Become a nonprofitable customer not well dealt with. Ack.
    The potential for abuse is way to great. I have heard of no laws about the use of RFID tags. Right now they are being used on Gillette razors, being very expensive and easily stolen. Problem is, these chips are being made by the billion. You tryin' to tell me they sell BILLIONS of razors? Bah! There are 'plastic watch' chips for military use, used in Haiti for the refugee crisis.
    Some tech specs-they are supposed to be burnt out at time of purchase, but they aren't, possible shielding on metal products(cans, etc.) Current readers have up to 20' read range. To deactivate them, microwave for a few secs, but set item on fire. Some are embedded in sandals. That would come in handy for tracking you. Unless you are an anti 1984ist(wow!, created a newspeak!), this should start to sound nasty. Someone with a scanner with devious intent could know all about you by scanning your curbed Hefty Cinchsack. Take an item, plant at a scene of a crime. *knock knock* "Mr. Jones, we have evidence that links you to...."
    Like I said, there are ZERO laws concerning the use of these buggers. No search warrants, just scanning.
    I try to be well informed, but biometrics seems better, because you know when they are being accessed, but still intrusive. With this junk(RFID), you will have the Law of Unintended consequences knocking on your door.
    There are way too many possible abuses to go into, thx for patiently reading rant.

    --
    This mind intentionally left blank.
    The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
    1. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by casuist99 · · Score: 1

      Got a link or citation of any sort for "beamed into your head(REAL technology-trial balloon tested in Japan!)"? It sounds patently ridiculous and any actual technology this is similar to would be vastly different from how you've described it, I think. Still, I'm always interested in educating myself. If you've got the link, post it here or submit to /. for the front page. Something tells me that if it's legit, it'll get posted.

    2. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Enter your phone number into google sometime- it's not that hard to track you RIGHT NOW.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    3. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look folks, Walmart is forcing the use of tags on all their products.

      Where is the moderation for -1 Tinfoil Hat when you need it. Wal-Mart does not currently require tags on all of their products. Wal-Mart has no explicit requirements that all its products be RFIDed in the near future. They are currently just trying to get the crates RFIDed. Yes, they probably going to require all products be tagged sometime in the future. But that is not what you said.

    4. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by Joe+'Nova' · · Score: 1

      I don't have a handy linkie, but it is in research by Japanese, current tech'd in Army Psy/Black Ops. Look under that in Google. There are also weapons that incapacitate large crowds with microwaves, making it non-lethal. All sorts of Utility Belt stuff..

      --
      This mind intentionally left blank.
      The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
    5. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by casuist99 · · Score: 1

      I call bullshit. The human mind is not a thing that can have things beamed into it from a distance. You're seriously full of shit. Every brain is different, no brain has an RF antenna on top of it, so that leaves you with going in through one of the 5 senses or physically manipulating synapses from a distance (technologically impossible). If you're going through a sense, it's not "beamed in" so again, I call bullshit.

    6. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by Joe+'Nova' · · Score: 1

      And neither does a MICROWAVE burrito. So what's the point?

      --
      This mind intentionally left blank.
      The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
    7. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by Joe+'Nova' · · Score: 1

      As I said, I don't have Gov't studies of psychotronic weaps, but would anyone admit it? And the signal beamed has to be language specific.

      All I can give you is high tension power lines effect brain patterns, as well as 60 cps refresh rate of a TV/monitor. Subliminal 'buy ads' in movies. Hearing, not sound, is a modulation of the inner ear cochlea, doesn't matter how that is done. That shows effect at a distance. It doesn't take much more to modulate.

      Any mods looking at thread will want to mod for offtopic unfortunately. :(

      --
      This mind intentionally left blank.
      The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
    8. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by casuist99 · · Score: 1

      or troll or just overrated because you're a freakin' moron (of course, I may be too for taking your bait). how much tinfoil is your hat made of, sir? Take it off, go outside, and stop believing what the X-files and your conspiracy websites tell you. That's all I have to say.

    9. Re:Ummm, you hate privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point-'n'-Shoot Sound Makes Waves

      http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,5048 3, 00.html

      Ingorant fools are a tyrant's best friends.

  36. "The" local language my ass. by Kickasso · · Score: 2, Informative

    A full one third of the population there speaks Russian. It is a local language whether you want it or not. Compare the situation with that of the Swedish language in Finland. Shame, I tells ya.

    1. Re:"The" local language my ass. by mikk · · Score: 1
      It isn't a local language when local people don't speak it. Those who speak russian are colonialists. They were sent to Estonia with one idea only - to destroy Estonian language culture and race. It is a documented and well proven fact!

      We don't need to feel sorry for them nor accept them to our community. They are like bullets inside our wounds. In order to heal we need to get them out!

    2. Re:"The" local language my ass. by daniil · · Score: 1
      Sir, you're an idiot.

      It isn't a local language when local people don't speak it.

      First of all, i'd like to remind you that quite a few of the Russians (and other "aliens") living in Estonia were living there already before the Soviet occupation. It's a documented fact.

      Secondly, all of them have been living in Estonia for years. I'd venture that quite a lot of them have been living there longer than you have. How come then that you are more local than they are? They were sent to Estonia with one idea only - to destroy Estonian language culture and race.

      Noone but yourselves can destroy your language. Looking at what's going on in Estonia today, you seem to be doing quite well at it. I mean, damn, it's pure evil if someone speaks Russian, yet you don't see any problem in you and many other Estonians speaking English. Don't you find it disturbing that quite a large number of Estonians would be willing to educate their children in English only, if they were given the chance?

      We don't need to feel sorry for them nor accept them to our community. They are like bullets inside our wounds. In order to heal we need to get them out!

      Oh yes you do have to integrate them into your society. Unless, of course, you don't want it to function properly. If you do actually want those high crime rates and other problems that arise from the current situation, then go on, keep discriminating them. But i don't really think it's a good idea.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    3. Re:"The" local language my ass. by taara · · Score: 1

      First of all, i'd like to remind you that quite a few of the Russians (and other "aliens") living in Estonia were living there already before the Soviet occupation. It's a documented fact. Secondly, all of them have been living in Estonia for years. I'd venture that quite a lot of them have been living there longer than you have. How come then that you are more local than they are?

      Woah! Woah! Off topic it was and off topic it will be!
      You seem to be misinformed, Sir! Where did You get this as a 'documented fact'? The Documented Fact IS, that before the soviet occupation, there was <5% russian-speaking people living mostly along the coast of lake Peipsi, and they spoke also estonian. There were also finno-ugrian communities over the lake Peipsi. When the soviet occupation came, the tables were turned. The local russians were suppressed, and the "common people" from russia were intoduced. They did not ask questions and did not ponder deeply what is happening. To make room for them a lot of estonians were sent to Siberia where only few of them survived. And there we are... Russia does not acknowledge the occupation, so they don't call occupants back. Estonians are stuck with them and are getting along surprisingly well with them. Some of occupants were offered the opportunity, based on the US money, for moving back to Russia. Some of them took the opportunity and moved, but some sold the house in Russia and stayed nevertheless. The problem is that they are loyal to Russia and they do not want to integrate into Estonian society. At the other side, Russia is using them to protect it's interests. Could some of you imgine Turkey threatening Germany, because Turk-speaking people in germany are seemingly having less rights than german-speaking? But it is happening regarding Russia-Estonia :(

      It is weird, but it is not illogical, come to think how badly Russians need again the free access to Baltic sea. They are still acting as occupants.

      BTW, no one is speaking about the rights of finno-ugrian societies over the lake Peipsi. The territory is still under the Russia and they are integrating quite well - I am not well informed about them, but information from broadcasts television and radio suggests that they are now speaking only russian.

      Noone but yourselves can destroy your language. Looking at what's going on in Estonia today, you seem to be doing quite well at it. I mean, damn, it's pure evil if someone speaks Russian, yet you don't see any problem in you and many other Estonians speaking English. Don't you find it disturbing that quite a large number of Estonians would be willing to educate their children in English only, if they were given the chance?

      Again I have to wonder, From Where Did You Get This Information? Estonian social workers and other workers who have to do a lot of communication (medicine, banking, etc.) have to speak at least estonian and russian. Nobody is going to stand on toess if the Russian is heard. Mostly the estonians are answering to Russian question on the street in Russian language. There was a study about educating in english, but you did not mention that the ones, who proposed most the english-only education were the local non-estonian speaking russians. Their logic being that it is not worth to learn estonian because Estonia is so small, but english speaking would have a lot of chances in Europe and, why not, also over the ocean.

    4. Re:"The" local language my ass. by andot · · Score: 1

      I think mikk used too harsh words about the soviet people we have here. But Soviet Union used the same tactics here, which China is using in Tibet.

    5. Re:"The" local language my ass. by daniil · · Score: 1
      Gah.

      You seem to be misinformed, Sir! Where did You get this as a 'documented fact'?

      Troll? Maybe. Misinformed? Hardly. Just because i didn't mention any concrete numbers it doesn't mean i'm misinformed. Yeah, i know there weren't many Russians living in Estonia before the war. But my point was, that not all of the Russians living in Estonia are colonists.

      The problem is that they are loyal to Russia and they do not want to integrate into Estonian society.

      Yes and no. The (or, rather: another) problem is that this "integration" is more about assimilation. Russians are supposed to adopt Estonian language and culture, but this is not all there is to integration. Integration is supposed to work both ways: you give them some, they give you some. I don't, however, see this happening.

      BTW, no one is speaking about the rights of finno-ugrian societies over the lake Peipsi. The territory is still under the Russia and they are integrating quite well - I am not well informed about them, but information from broadcasts television and radio suggests that they are now speaking only russian.

      Yet again, you're confusing integration with assimilation.

      Again I have to wonder, From Where Did You Get This Information? Estonian social workers and other workers who have to do a lot of communication (medicine, banking, etc.) have to speak at least estonian and russian. Nobody is going to stand on toess if the Russian is heard.

      Mea culpa. I should have made it more clear that "Russian = Evil" is what the grandparent poster seems to think, not what everyone in Estonia thinks.

      There was a study about educating in english, but you did not mention that the ones, who proposed most the english-only education were the local non-estonian speaking russians. Their logic being that it is not worth to learn estonian because Estonia is so small, but english speaking would have a lot of chances in Europe and, why not, also over the ocean.

      Yeah, i guess i should have mentioned this, but i only remembered it after i had posted this. But i still don't think this makes any difference to what i said: Estonians are voluntarily destroying their own culture.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    6. Re:"The" local language my ass. by taara · · Score: 1

      Yeah, i know there weren't many Russians living in Estonia before the war. But my point was, that not all of the Russians living in Estonia are colonists.

      Hmm. I beg to disagree. This was not at all the point in your previous post. Or the point was wery efficiently hidden between the lines. If you were just trolling, then may I ask why? Trolling does not get one anywhere... Let's just not troll :|

      The (or, rather: another) problem is that this "integration" is more about assimilation. Russians are supposed to adopt Estonian language and culture, but this is not all there is to integration. Integration is supposed to work both ways: you give them some, they give you some. I don't, however, see this happening.

      You may be right. Estonians are expecting the colonists assimilate, rather than integrate. But what else can be expected from them? Cultural differences are so big that when the integration will be actually tried, there will be estonians no more... And estonians may fear that Russia will finalize the colonization at last. Russia is making big fuss in Europe about Russian minorities in Estonia, or Latvia, or Lithuania. It is as if trying to make it look that this culture is so unique. But the fact is that this culture is not far away, given the ~60 years for it to evolve, from the Mother Russia culture. The progeny of russians, who lived in estonia before occupation actually do disdain the abovementioned minority protection. The most stable solution for all parts would be that Russia will call the colonists back. But this is not going to happen. And given the economical situation in Estonia and Russia - the colonists will not go back to Russia voluntarily, because they are mutch better off in Estonia. Would Estonia just hand them the citizenship, they will be assimilated in Europe in no time. This is, of course, if Russian will not be declared official language in Estonia.

      But i still don't think this makes any difference to what i said: Estonians are voluntarily destroying their own culture.

      Yes, sadly you are right. There are some, including me, who would argue that this is the direct consequense of 60 years assimilation with the culture of colonists. (I might be right, and also might be wrong, who knows...) Not the culture of Russia, but the culture of Russian colonists. They were rootless, their culture included for example going to theatre and wearng a nightgown, etc. etc... (And I am not making this up). During the 60years, inevitably some of it soaked into minds of estonians. Now when the Estonia is independent with capitalistic economy, older estonians still behave as learnt during the 60 years. This is definitely way it should not go and it makes me really worried :( ZZ

    7. Re:"The" local language my ass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you miss one thing -- Estonia was part of Russian Empire much more than 60 years. It was part of the Russia IIRC since 29 september 1710. It was "occupied" or "freed" during Russian-Sweden "North War".

    8. Re:"The" local language my ass. by daniil · · Score: 1
      If you were just trolling, then may I ask why?

      Because i'm evil *grins* And because the n-parent (aka mikk) was being an idiot and thus deserved it.

      This is definitely way it should not go and it makes me really worried :( ZZ

      Eriti irooniline on seejuures, et kaks eestlast arutlevad nende probleemide yle (võrdlemisi kehvas) inglise keeles yhes Ameerika veebifoorumis.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    9. Re:"The" local language my ass. by taara · · Score: 1

      If you were just trolling, then may I ask why?
      Because i'm evil *grins* And because the n-parent (aka mikk) was being an idiot and thus deserved it.


      I think you are a bit too hasty giving out medical diagnoses. Mikk may have been trolling the same way as you were. Before calling him an idiot, think twice - the diagnose you are declaring may point also to yourself.

      Eriti irooniline on seejuures, et kaks eestlast arutlevad nende probleemide yle (võrdlemisi kehvas) inglise keeles yhes Ameerika veebifoorumis.

      Let's translate:
      It is especially ironical, that two estonians are arguing about those problems (in relatively poor) english, on one of the American Internet forums.

      The /. forum may reside in America, but it is read and commented practically from over the globe. Does it mean that /. can effectively be called international Internet forum? I think so. The problem, we are talking about, is not internal affair of Estonia (it involves also Russia and Russian occupants, not to mention EU, USA and other parties), I think that it is not too ironical to held this dispute on the /. . After all, one of the reasons why people read /., is the urge to broaden everyones own horizon :-)

      PS: May I ask, why have you replaced 'ü' by 'y' in your posting? The two characters are pronounced almost the same in swedish. Finnish people are not using 'ü' at all. But your comment was in in estonian...

    10. Re:"The" local language my ass. by daniil · · Score: 1
      I think you are a bit too hasty giving out medical diagnoses. Mikk may have been trolling the same way as you were.

      Never underestimate the stupidity of other people. Including me.

      I think that it is not too ironical to held this dispute on /.

      No, it's not. What is ironic, however, is that we're (well, at least i am) complaining about how English is taking over, and yet we're doing it, gasp, in English. (OK, i do understand that it's a bit more appropriate to use English here, as someone might actually *read* this thread)

      PS: May I ask, why have you replaced 'ü' by 'y' in your posting? The two characters are pronounced almost the same in swedish. Finnish people are not using 'ü' at all. But your comment was in in estonian...

      First of all, if you haven't guessed it yet then i'm an Estonian. That's why i find holding this conversation in English so funny (well, that and my bizarre sense of humour).

      Miks ma kasutan ü asemel y-d? See võis vist olla Johannes Aavik, kes ytles, et nii on õigem, sest ü on germaani laen jne. Teiseks on mulle kardetavasti halvasti mõjunud täpitähtedeta klaviatuuri kasutamine -- ole õnnelik, et ma õ asemel 6 ei kirjuta :H Kolmandaks -- ja see on tegelt vist peamine põhjus -- on ilmselt tegu järjekordse katsega millegipoolest teistest erineda*.

      (Translation: The reason why i use 'y' instead of 'ü' is that this is supposedly more correct Estonian (because of the Fenno-Ugric roots'n'all). That and the bad effects of using a US keyboard. Oh, and i also think it's cool :)

      * Kui nyyd järele mõelda, siis muudab see muuhulgas ka mu käekirja veidi loetavamaks...

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
  37. In Finland.... by dnaumov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It has pretty much always been possible to track any given persons GSM mobile phone. You wouldnt believe the amount of crimes this has helped solve and prevent as well as the amount of people who get lost and get found only thanks to their phone signal. Everyone I know owns a mobile phone. Everyone I know KNOWS that you can be tracked through your cellphone. I am yet to hear ANYBODY complain.

    1. Re:In Finland.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so do the criminals.

      So you're only catching the dumb ones, which you probably would've caught anyway.

      HOWEVER, this wasn't what the system was billed to the government with, was it "Catches the crooks too dumb to get around it"?

    2. Re:In Finland.... by mikk · · Score: 1

      The same thing is also possible in Estonia. It is used by emergency services and police. People in panic aren't always able to explain where they are so operator can just check the screen.

    3. Re:In Finland.... by flex941 · · Score: 1

      But you can turn your phone off at any given time. You can't turn your ID card off I suppose (besides destructing it).

    4. Re:In Finland.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I am yet to hear ANYBODY complain.

      That should be your warning. I would feel safer if I had (and still can hear) someone complain.

    5. Re:In Finland.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know that mobile phones can be also activated if theyre turned on?
      Yes, nice way of tapping.
      Russians have made also security products that can prevent this
      but anyway if youre not a gangster or oil company director, its pointless.

  38. Is it really RFID? by seanfuller · · Score: 0

    I really don't think that these cards are using RFID. They are probably something like the Philips MIFARE card. The way I understand it, contactless smartcards have a much shorter range than RFID chips (~5 cm) and they can store more data (4KB, 8KB, 16KB).

    --
    Sean Lane Fuller - The truth is out there!
  39. national id cards... all countries have them by sinnfeiner1916 · · Score: 0

    even the USA. They are called "Passports."

    --
    The More Laws, the less Justice --Marcus Tullius Cicero
    1. Re:national id cards... all countries have them by trout_fish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A passport is not the same as a national ID card. No one is required to hold a passport, so can refuse to show it, or pretend that they do not have one. The same goes for driving licenses.

      A compulsory national ID card is very different. You cannot claim not to have it, and hence can be required to produce it - even if that requirement is not immediate.

  40. libertarions unite!! whine about RFID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Isn't that what this is?? If a secure way can be found to implement RFID isn't that a good thing?? Small losses of personal liberty when we have a global threat to non-muslims seems imsignificant. Chose your priority, life and security vs. political correctness. Oh Nancy, I'm afraid!!!! If want to improve RFID technology, be part of the solution, dont just be a group of frikking whiners like usual.

    1. Re:libertarions unite!! whine about RFID by Flarn+Sauce · · Score: 1

      Libertarions? From the planet Libertario? All hail Libertario! May her glory shine forever!!!

  41. Why are you arresting me? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    Well acourding to our tracking systems you went round to that drug dealers house every day for more than a month.

    Maybe you spent a few too many hours in a mosque.

    Maybe you a postman...

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  42. Re:In Soviet Estonia.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I think it is a reference to Kievan Rus, a state formed by Vikings in present-day Ukraine. The capital of Kievan Rus would probably have been Kiev, which is still an important city in Ukraine. Anyway, Kievan Rus was in the apex of its power in the 10th century, but regardless of the intervening Mongol invasion, I believe that the later state of Russia is commonly regarded as a historical development of Kievan Rus. Warning: There's a lot of half-remembered history here. I hope someone who knows better will now correct my blatant mistakes... or maybe I should just check out Wikipedia.

  43. Estonia in the EU by tuxette · · Score: 1
    As an EU country, Estonia will have to not only follow the EU Personal Data Directive but also write and implement data protection legislation with the EU Directive as a minimum basis.

    So at least for now, the Estonian government (or whoever else) cannot "just" track anyone in Estonia.

    --
    People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
  44. Way too geeky, and miss the point. by GuyFawkes · · Score: 2, Insightful


    I _AM_ me, not only do I know this for an ABSOLUTE FACT, but those people that I know (family, friends, lovers, ect) also know it (and vice versa of course)

    Outside of a body-snatcher type science fiction film I am my own walking talking biometric identifier, even a 20-seconds-to-complete perfect genetic clone still won't fool anyone unless you can ALSO fill that perfect genetic clone with a perfect copy of my brain and memories, attitudes, experiences, dreams, fears, etc etc etc.

    The idea that ANY subset of that data can be used to identify me with a usefully high positive degree of accuracy and a usefully low negative degree of accuracy is patently retarded.

    Biometric ID was essentially instroduced by the police, in the form of fingerprints, eg on a murder weapon, as a method of tying one unique individual amongst many to a specific event at a specific time and place via a specific identifier, eg the fingerprint.

    Fact is the fingerprint, far from foolproof and not that hard to fake (and getting easier as time passes) is still the best, in that it is fairly unique, but it still takes significant human detective effort to match a print to a suspect.

    The advent of DNA testing has NOT improved accuracy (english law is already littered with example of overturned convictions that were based on flawed DNA evidence), it has lowered it (the billions to one stuff is bullshit, DNA tests do not match you entire genome, just a few (literally) nodes, most of whom you will share anyway with genetically similar humans, eg people from your area, especially distant relatives.

    Adding extra bits of data, eg iris pattern, blood type, known allergies, pantone skin colour, proportion of mercury or other heavy metals in the body, can ONLY EVER INCREASE ACCURACY is the police detective / forensic sense, when trying to match a specific individual to a particular event at a particular place and time.

    IT WILL BE NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER as a general everyday method of identifying "me" from "you", and using that ID for the purposes of granting or restricting access to something, eg my bank account or workplace computer.

    ON THE CONTRARY, since there is no instant method of verification of the ID card data against the individual holding it, the very fact that there is a wealth of data on the card will make it easier for me to withdraw cash from your ATM, and then slit the next passer by's throat, thus not only tying YOU in with this crime, but creating a good alibi for myself, since MY ID card doesn't match the data left at the scene of the crime by YOUR card.

    We will then be in the ludicrous situation, which happens today in courts up and down the land, where the absolutely MOST reliably form of ID verification, friends and family, are dismissed, ignored or worse still branded as liars and conspirators, for contradicting the Identity "EVIDENCE" which states that you were not at home with them, you were drawing money from an ATM 30 feet from the murder scence within 60 seconds of the murder.

    This is a parallel with the "smashed mechanical analogue watch or timepiece" showing the time of death, or at least the time the person was struck by the car of fell from the roof, the modern more accurate with calculator bluetooth and god know what digital timepiece gives more information to the coroner, but ZERO USEFUL INFORMATION.

    No, ID exists only for the same purposes as the original fingerprint checks, to tie a specific person to a specific place.

    ID as a method of general identification is a whole different game, and the only systems that have EVER been accepted as having ANY worth are those that were based on the original public / private key verification / signing thing, and which still apply today if I want to sit a driving test in the UK and do NOT have one of the new photcoard driving licences, but an older no picture type, I must bring a photograph of me, SIGNED BY PEOPLE OF STANDING IN THE COMMUNITY (my doctor, local policeman, bank manager, etc) WHO K

    --
    http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
    1. Re:Way too geeky, and miss the point. by GuyFawkes · · Score: 1


      EG

      I _can_ verify that that is indeed my driving licence.

      My driving licence cannot ever verify that this is indeed me.

      --
      http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
    2. Re:Way too geeky, and miss the point. by mpe · · Score: 1

      I _can_ verify that that is indeed my driving licence.

      The real point of your driving licence is to prove that you are permitted to drive certain catqagories of of motor vehicles on the public road. Generally that you have passed some tests to show basic competence and have not subsequently been caught doing stupid things which endanger other road users.

  45. Biometrics just don't work? by crovira · · Score: 1

    What's supposed to work them? Forgetable passwords?

    Biometrics work. And the level of detail beats the snot out of some password.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  46. Malta has been thinking of this too apparently by wolverine1999 · · Score: 1

    See CIMU
    which says A potential solution in this regard is that of merging the smart card with the National ID Card - thereby providing the citizen with an integrated card based on a medium which in our culture is used continually. This approach has been adopted successfully in Finland and Malaysia. The major stumbling block in this regard could be the Electoral Commission - and its buy-in should be sought in this regard.

    Also it says: It is interesting to note that in late 1999, in New Zealand, news of a national smart card for health and welfare caused an uproar that eventually forced the Prime Minster to publicly dissociate his Government from the technology.

    A report by the CCTA in the UK had identified driving licences as ideal for first cards.


    Meanwhile the e-ID has been introduced which is I believe the same thing, but produced by Microsoft according to local news. Here's a link about it.

    1. Re:Malta has been thinking of this too apparently by wolverine1999 · · Score: 1

      Oops. I meant similar rather than the same thing. e-ID is online only for the time being. If I'm not mistaken it is windows-only since Microsoft is involved.

    2. Re:Malta has been thinking of this too apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also it says: It is interesting to note that in late 1999, in New Zealand, news of a national smart card for health and welfare caused an uproar that eventually forced the Prime Minster to publicly dissociate his Government from the technology.

      In late 1999, the Prime Minister of New Zealand was a woman. If that's the sort of accuracy level they're working to, how reliable is whatever else they say?

  47. wardriving for RFID's by auzy · · Score: 1

    I can see it now. Considering people have managed to access a bluetooth mobile from 2 miles away with a well designed antenna, it wont take long for people to catch on with the RFID's. Makes it easier for stalkers too I guess

  48. Re:Refrences.. by Zeal0t · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    no more battle royale for you. kthxbye.

  49. Um ... by AzrealAO · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing something here... But can't that happen here too? You lose your card, they cancel it, and they issue you a new one. The only thing here is, that only YOU can use your card. If someone steals it, they can't activate it because they can't fake your biometric data, and by the time they figure out how to activate it, or fake your biometric info, the card has been cancelled and replaced. So when it get's lost or stolen, you report the card missing, it get's cancelled, and they issue a new one that only you can use/activate. Biometric passwords are an additional layer of security, not the only layer.

    1. Re:Um ... by datajack · · Score: 1

      There's two ways of looking at the biometrics/card system, and both have their flaws...

      It depends on wether the biometric information 'unlocks' the identifying information on the card (like a PIN for an ATM card), or wether the card provides biometric information that is then compared to you, in order to prove who you are.

      In the first case, the card acts as the authentication credentials and so can be revoked and replaced. However, any replacement is unlocked by the same biometric data which has already been compromised. In which case, the card may as well be left unprotected.

      The second option is effectively what I was describing in the earlier posts. Either way, the use of biometrics in this context introduces security concerns.

  50. You don't need new fingerprints... by AzrealAO · · Score: 1

    Your card gets cancelled and a new one gets issued.

    Even if someone fakes your biometric information, the lost/stolen card doesn't work anymore.

  51. The obvious prank by Eudial · · Score: 1

    "Misplacing" your ID-card in someones trunk.

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
  52. Re:s/taxpayers/state property by flex941 · · Score: 1

    So you have been on crack for last 15 years?

  53. WTF, Estonia is a nazist state!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    As in, Estonia is a country that honors Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party on an official level; it is a country that has an official policy of apartheid, a country with honest-to-goodness racial purity laws.


    A card with "RFID's" is the least you can expect from a country where the president officially sanctioned a memorial to the Waffen SS. (Hitler's elite troops.)


    Think with your brain and don't swallow the propaganda fed to you.

  54. Russian invasion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Of course not.


    Midget EU-sponsored pseudo-states like Estonia will crawl back begging to Russia when their current pimp stops using them.


    Such is the life of a baltic state. Tant pis.

  55. Not Stalin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The deaths in Ukraine and southern Russia were caused by the Neocon Idol Trotsky and his Jewish cheerleader team.

    But of course, it is ever-so-much easier to ignore the fact that one of the worst genocides of the 20th century had, in fact, a Jewish origin. Much nicer to just blame the Georgians, huh?

    And I won't mention that the vast majority of the genocide was borne by the Cossacks, not by the Ukrainians. But who cares, right, since they didn't have Jewish support?

  56. Gestapo. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Not too strange for a country where all the top officials support Hitler's Nazi Germany.

    (The fact that the Third Reich hasn't existed for the last fifty years hasn't stopped these scumbags.)

  57. Heil Hitler, dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Moron, your nazist ramblings only serve to drive Estonia deeper into misery.

    The current crop of "European Unificators", just like their ideological forebear Mr. Adolf "United Europe" Hitler, will throw your piss-poor piddling midget states on the trash heap of history once they are done using them as a geopolitical maxipad.

  58. Sounds Pretty High-Tech by Compulawyer · · Score: 2, Funny
    Especially for a country whose economy is based on the export of its most plentiful natural resource: Mud.

    Oh, Estonia ... I was thinking Elbonia. Sorry - my bad.

    --

    Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.

  59. I have Contactless ID cards too ... by Gopal.V · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is a magnetic card which needs to be moved about 1 1/2 inch in front of the reader . The magnetic card is topped by a Photo ID , so it the contactless means almost zero wear and tear of swiping.

    All doors in the office open as soon as you flash the ID cards (the doors beep , and everyone looks up at you as if to say "what are you doing roaming around") ... being a card-puncher like this means they track my in and out timings (like when I leave my floor for lunch or stuff).

    The entry into various rooms are restricted like this (this is an outsourcing company , so clients are very very paranoid about "nonfull disclosure" being maintained). Testing server room doors could with your ID could even get you fired here ..

    It need not be RFID or anything magic - just extend the reader to something like the metal detector in an airport to read this magnetic ink (holding this against the noonday sun shows that these are lines/bar-codes running the whole length of the card like those security threads in currency)....

    And I'm sitting here clocking the first 9 1/2 of the 47 1/2 hours needed for the week , commenting on slashdot :)

  60. Of course it helps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...when 100% of your GDP comes from "foreign aid".

  61. It's a matter of trust by NoMercy · · Score: 1

    Do I trust my goverment, fu*k no :)

    The ID card in itself isn't the problem, so much as the handing of a unique identifing key which is common accross every database ever stored on you, the goverment is then free to intergrate that database into one huge database, there designing proper leglislation to add to the number of things which are stored in the database but none to remove information.

    And then what stops them from using the increased computational capacity of the future to look at the database and spot abnormalities, some bright spark might even find an alogrythum to predict the chances of a parent harming there child and just by pure fluke youre stasticly likely to harm your child and they take your children from you.

    Yes I'm paranoid, but...
    Do I trust my goverment, fu*k no :)

  62. The only documented fact in the vicinity by Kickasso · · Score: 1

    is that you are a racist pig. You've just neatly documented it yourself. Thank you, and please die soon.

  63. Re:s/taxpayers/state property by uxo · · Score: 1
    How can you claim the lofty title of taxpayer, when you live in a socialist state?

    Estonia is a parliamentary republic.
  64. Re:s/taxpayers/state property by jmuzic1 · · Score: 1

    Estonia is one of the most free-market oriented countries in all of europe. It is ranked 6th in the world for economic freedom (above both the UK and US). Get your facts straight. And since no one ever cites sources I'll humor you http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/co untries.html

  65. Privacy laws in Europe by UnConeD · · Score: 1

    'Telemarketing'? What's that?

  66. Definition of "No Reason" is subjective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US Supreme Court upheld random traffic stops to check for people driving under the influence (don't have the citation handy ... I think it was in Michigain and in the 80's).

    Point being, if they have no reason, they'll come up with one by the time they get get out of their car.

    An actual example: person is driving in my home town in NJ. New Jersey like many states permit you to turn right on red unless otherwise posted-- the actual wording is something to the affect 'a driver shall come to a complete stop, and only if the conditions are safe shall turn right'). The way the law has always been interpreted is that it's the driver's perogative on what is 'safe' and that the driver may choose not to turn right.

    A cop pulled someone over for not turning at a red light and .. surprise, this person happened to have marijuana in their car.

    1. Re:Definition of "No Reason" is subjective by instarx · · Score: 1

      The US Supreme Court upheld random traffic stops to check for people driving under the influence (don't have the citation handy ... I think it was in Michigain and in the 80's).

      I'm not going to look up the cases, but I think you are wrong in this case. Random stops of individual drivers are NOT legal, but random checkpoints where ALL drivers are stopped are legal.

    2. Re:Definition of "No Reason" is subjective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point taken (yes, I believe you are right).

      Still ... it's being randomly stopped .... I think it was one of the worst decisions wrt the 'rights' of drivers ...

      I'm not going to get into a debate right now about what rights you give up to drive ... I don't think the founders would have improved with giving up rights just to have the 'priveledge' of doing something that in reality is necessary in modern society ...

  67. Australian card by sbszine · · Score: 1

    Instead we get to carry our driver's licences, which function as defacto ID cards. I don't have a car, but I keep renewing my licence so I can get by. Big win, eh?

    --

    Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling

    1. Re:Australian card by Beautyon · · Score: 1

      It was a big win. The Australians turned around a major government initiative through a grass roots movement of ordinary citizens. That is no small thing.

      You VOLUNTARILY renew your drivers licence. The government ID card scheme that was defeated was to be COMPULSORY for all Australians.

      I really detest the flippant and ignorant dismissal of victories like this. Its mostly done by people who have not even thought about this subject, or how democracy is being destroyed by governments that dont listen to their electorate.

      --
      ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
    2. Re:Australian card by sbszine · · Score: 1

      You VOLUNTARILY renew your drivers licence. The government ID card scheme that was defeated was to be COMPULSORY for all Australians.

      That's great, but as I've been trying to tell you above, the licence is neccessary to conduct a normal life. Having a licence is not compulsory by law, but providing ID when you do certain things is, and if you don't provide a licence you have to provide your passport. No-one wants to carry around a passport, so everyone gets a licence ASAP. If you're arrested by the cops they ask for your licence, even if you're not driving. Do you get me?

      I'm an Australian and a lefty, and I love it when a grass roots movement defeats some evil (as happened here when the draft was overturned), but sadly, the ID card was not the victory it appeared to be. It's a shame, and I wish it were otherwise, but that's how I see it.

      Anyway, keep fighting the good fight wherever you are.

      --

      Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling

  68. not so funny by mr.+spike+2 · · Score: 1

    i am in a close to eesti neighborhood country - LV..

    Of course they are on to track my ass everywhere i go. As most paying and stuff where you nee to show Your identity will now be able to log times and other stuff in one bis log.

    Remember that it's not paranoid to be aware of technology used against You.
    Be Sure - It Will. For example: if you have something bad to say about crap like EU or pretty regular fraud done by government officials - Those "good guys" will be instantly able to dig up everyhing they need to discredit You and stuff like that.

  69. Re:In Finland.... joker:D by WaffaDrunker · · Score: 1

    You can place your RFID to wallet what blocks all the information in & out You can buy them from internet :)

    --
    It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!