Slashdot Mirror
France May Require Biometric ID Cards
Will Affleck-Asch writes "According to an article on Infoworld today, France may require her citizens pay for new identity cards that hold their biometric information in electronic format. The French government outlined its plan last month to replace the identity cards and passports offered to French citizens with new ones that carry a microchip containing digitized photographs and fingerprints. The plan is to introduce the passports in 2006, and the identity cards a year later. Citizens haven't been forced to carry ID cards since 1955."
This is misleading. While there is no "National ID Card", You're required by law to carry ID at all times in France, and the police may ask to see it at their discretion.
A less confusing way of putting it would have been, "While a national ID card hasn't existed in France since 1955, French people are required carry some form of valid ID with them."
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
In the UK, it appears that, having had the government's draconian ID card plans rejected (for the time being), they're planning to start the biometric-isation process early, by adding compulsory fingerprints to our passports. However, it also appears that this doesn't need democratic consent - they can just do it whenever they feel like. Oh, and bury it halfway through a busy election campaign too.
These fingerprints will, you guessed it, be stored on a gigantic database that the police can consult whenever they feel like.
May I suggest that anyone in the UK who finds these plans... disturbing... lets someone know about it.
I don't know if you've noticed but the US is now requiring biometric passports to allow entry on the Visa Waiver Program.
m s/telegr ams_1393.html
e.g.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegra
So, next time the bombers will have to get visas to enter the country... Just like last time.
Deleted
The ID card would probably contain fingerprint data and a digital signature saying that the government recognizes the fingerprint as that of one of its citizens. The fingerprint doesn't even need to be connected to the person's identity.
Without that, how could scanners at airports and other public locations decide to accept or reject a person based on her fingerprint ? Send it to a big-brother-esque central database, uh ? OK, the scanner still needs to download a list of revocated IDs from time to time.
ID + fingerprint = something you have + something you are.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=biometric+hash
First result:
Biometric hash based on statistical features of online signatures
Vielhauer, C. Steinmetz, R. Mayerhofer, A.
Abstract: Presents an approach to generating biometric hash values based on statistical features in online signature signals. Whilst the output of typical online signature verification systems are threshold-based true-false decisions, based on a comparison between test sample signals and sets of reference signals, our system responds to a signature input with a biometric hash vector, which is calculated based on an individual interval matrix. Especially for applications, which require key management strategies, hash values are of great interest, as keys can be derived directly from the hash value, whereas a verification decision can only grant or refuse access to a stored key. Further, our approach does not require storage of templates for reference signatures, thus increases the security of the system. In our prototype implementation, the generated biometric hash values are calculated on a pen-based PDA and used for key generation for a future secure data communication between a PDA and a server by encryption. First tests show that the system is actuality able to generate stable biometric hash values of the users and although the system was exposed to skilled forgeries, no test person was able to reproduce another subject's hash vector.
It is my understanding that all of the 9/11 terrorists had valid U.S. IDs (drivers licenses, mostly) and/or valid passports which had been scrutinized at the border. These IDs were all in their own names (though perhaps not in the name under which they were wanted). So far as I know, no one has suggested that they had obtained these IDs fraudulently: they all could have gotten the new biometric IDs that so many seem to want.
We knew who they were, and some of them were on ``wanted'' or ``watch'' lists under the names on their legitimate IDs, the IDs which they used to board their planes. Identity was never a factor in the 9/11 hijackings. Therefore, obviously, what we need to make sure it never happens again is a new, improved National ID system which will further tighten the government's control over us. Yes, indeed. It kept the Jews safe in the 1930s, after all. We'll try not to think about what happened to them in the 1940s.
All this isn't to quibble with what the parent post said, but to reinforce it.
See what I've been reading.