Slashdot Mirror
Real ID Act Poses Technical Challenges
segphault writes "Ars Technica has an article about some of the financial and technological challenges associated with implementing the Real ID Act." From the article: "Opposed by more than 600 independent organizations (including the National Governors Association) and hidden in the depths of a military spending bill in order to make passage easier, the Real ID Act has received heavy criticism from concerned citizens and state government agencies. Despite the fact that relatively sound and effective improvements to driver's license security had already been implemented as part of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, the federal government felt that it was necessary to go well beyond the recommendations of the 9/11 Comission Report by passing a costly and invasive law."
Unified
Federal
Identification
Act?
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
Why is it wrong for our government to be able to know which of us to protect and who to protect us from?
The 9/11 terrorists all had valid IDs. What's to stop the next batch of terrorists from getting valid Real IDs?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The consequences for not meeting the law's provisions are severe: those holding licenses from States that fail to meet the requirements by 2008 will not be permitted to fly on airplanes or enter federal buildings.
So the solution is to not get a license.
In any case, I can't see them possibly enforcing this, especially if you have multiple states or large states that don't meet the requirements. Frankly I think all states should just ignore the law. In a game of chicken between states and the federal government, the federal government can't win.
This has nothing to do with reducing terrorism and everything to do with reducing illegal immigration.
The competing Fake ID(tm) Act having been in full swing for several decades, released a statement syaing in part, "As long as there are teenagers, spring break, and alcohol, our business will continue to boom."
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
It's a depressing sign of just how far we've fallen when the objections to the Real ID act by the states all center around its feasibility, rather than all the reasons it's fundamentally flawed. You know, little things like "the federal government doesn't have the Consitutional authority to mandate a national ID," or "it won't actually do anything to combat terrorism," or "it's a single point source of failure in protection against identity theft," or "it runs completely contrary to the principles this country was founded upon."
This is the inverse of damning with faint praise. So, blessing with faint criticisms, or some such. It's analogous to arguing with a poster by critiquing his grammar or spelling. Just as that implicitly states you agree with the argument, this implicitly states Real ID is a good idea.
Problem is, there's nowhere left to run.
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
I know some people who don't have passports, or guys/gals who live in big cities and don't have a driver's license.
I suggest you go get yours renewed (or go get them if you don't have 'em) now, rather than when you need them.
Driver's licenses/State IDs are good for ~5 years and passports are good for 10 years.
Better do it now, before they institute radio tags, biometrics, or whatever other technology they plan to implement.
It's only a holding action, but I'll be happier knowing I put off the inevitable.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
If it's anything like Real Audio, thanks but no thanks.
My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
The Privacy Act of 1974
The constitution originally said nothing about the right of the federal government to tax the income of its citizens, but if the government is going to tax citizens, the last thing people want is for their tax dollars to be given to support the non-citizen welfare state in this country due to illegal immigration.
Furthermore, if an illegal immigrant crashes into your car, or damages your property, or defames your character, how are you going to sue someone who cannot be tracked down to receive a summons and who has no real identity anyways since they are here illegally?
Of course, you could make the argument that you don't want your tax dollars being used to finance the rebuilding Iraq, but that is "foreign aid" which is another debate entirely.
The real ID act is a necessary evil to deal with the long-term problem of massive illegal immigration into the United States which you can thank lately almost exclusively to George Bush's non-enforcement and political appeasement to much of the hispanic community in the United States which supports open borders as well as key business industries which use "slave" errr I mean "illegal" labor to do their bidding. It sucks that things have gotten this bad, but that is the price citizens in this country have to face for allowing their leaders to get away with failing to do the most fundamental basic job of a national government and that is to protect its borders from invading forces.
If common criminals, gang members, and illegal aliens can just cross over into the United States whenever they want and can't be prosecuted for their illegal status thanks to sanctuary laws in many municipalities with correct governments, what on earth is next the Mexican military itself?
Because they legally can't. And because SS # are reused. When you die your SS# will return to the regional pool and be reassigned. When you are trying to uniquely identify everyone, a repeating logic containing key is not a good idea ;)
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
It's a perfect example of the slippery slope and how these laws do nothing but take our civil liberties away and give power to the corrupt and incompetent. The TSA was supposed to screen for potential threats to airplane and passenger safety, NOT catch drug dealers. Soon, they'll be looking for deadbeat dads, or maybe, if you're behind on your credit card payments, they'll look for you!
Also, the cops "tested" what was in the condoms and said that it showed that the contents were illegal drugs. Subsequently, when tested by the DEA, it came back as flour. My point: The cops either lied or are incompetent.They should be fired and arrested themselves.
Also consider the wide variety of untested silicon snake oil being sold (eg. face recoginition doesn't work properly in the lab yet) by people making a buck out of a lot of dead people in New York. This is what you'll see again in the scramble to get methods to implement this ID system quickly - but it will all be for nothing if your local video library insists on using this ID for their records thus making it possible for others to use your ID for any purpose they wish.
'nuff said.
They seem to be stretching the truth on this one, the truth is that the official National Governors Association position is that they will happily make any kind of ID's requested as long as the federal government provides the funds.
Here is the official NGA statement:
http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.8358ec 82f5b198d18a278110501010a0/?vgnextoid=3f90d3add6da 2010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
Policy Position
printable version
03/03/2005
EDC-18. Driver's License and Personal Identification Card Integrity
The motor vehicle driver's license, which is issued by each state, is used as an official identification document as well as a document that demonstrates an individual's knowledge and ability to operate a motor vehicle. States also issue personal identification cards that can be used as an official identification document. Most driver's licenses and personal identification cards have common elements displayed, such as a photo, a signature, a unique identifier number, and the individual's physical description. This has made the state-issued driver's license and personal identification card the most acceptable forms of identification in America.
Governors are concerned about the security and integrity of state driver's licenses, state personal identification cards, and the identification process. They are committed to working cooperatively with the federal government to develop and implement realistic, achievable standards that will enhance efforts to prevent document fraud and other illegal activity related to the issuance of driver's licenses and identification documents.
In making changes to the current system of issuing driver's licenses and personal identification cards, Governors believe that any rule or regulation requiring a change to the driver's license document or the personal identification card document should only apply to newly issued, renewed, and duplicate driver's licenses and identification cards produced by a state. Furthermore, any rulemaking body that is prescribing new standards for driver's licenses or personal identification cards must perform an assessment of the annual benefits and costs of its recommendations. The federal government should provide adequate funding to states to implement any required mandate stemming from the rulemaking. At no time should the rulemaking body propose an unfunded mandate on states.
If anyone cares to actually read the provisions of the Act which implement the Real ID system, they'll see a provision which allows for easy compliance. In essence, my state can continue to issue licenses and ignore the data gathering burdens of the act by simply changing the color of the license and printing "not valid as federal identification" on the front.
Of course, then I may need some alternative form of ID if I wish to deal with a federal agency... But it's cheap this way.
Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
That's quite incorrect.
Read the 9th and 10th amendments:
In other words, according to the Bill of Rights, the fact that a right is not explicitly enumerated does not mean we don't have that right.
And, from the 10th Amendment, all powers that are not given to the government by the Constition and that are not prohibited by it to the states are reserved for the people or the states.
Thus, the Federal Government has no legal powers that are not explicitly set forth in the Constitution.
1) The Constitution states in the "Bill of Rights" set of ammendments some things the government cannot do. Creating a national ID isn't prohibited. Sure, the Constitution doesn't order the government to create a national ID either, but by default what isn't prohibited is allowed.
I don't want to be rude, but if you actually believe this, you really need to read the Constitution, with a specific focus on the 9th and 10th Amendments. I'm absolutely serious. You are perfectly, exactly, and 100% wrong about this. The Consitution explicitly states that the only things the fed.gov is allowed to do are those things enumerated in the Constitution; anything else is reserved to the people, or the states. I'm sorry if I'm coming across as an asshole, here; I'm not trying to. But, assuming you live in the US, it's apalling to me that you can be so fundamentally wrong about how our government works.
2) A national ID may not be the perfect "silver bullet" that kills terrorism once and for all, but it certainly would impose one more difficulty on terrorists.
Since the 9/11 terrorists were, prior to the attack, completely indiscernible from other, non-terrorist citizens, this is clearly a difficulty they have already overcome.
3) Identity theft can be done in a great number of ways today. A national ID, if properly implemented, could make identity theft much more difficult. Think about it, if someone shows a fake driver's license from North Dakota with your name on it, what are the chances that the bank teller will be able to detect the fraud?
As it currently stands, when someone breaks into, say, a credit card database, they get information on a couple million people. This proposes to set up a database with all the identifying information on everybody. If it breaks, the criminal has information on every single American citizen with a driver's license.
4) Why would a national ID be contrary to any principles the USA was founded upon? Do you think Washington and Jefferson were afraid to be recognized as themselves? There may be moments and places when I prefer to be anonymous, but when I need to show who I am I prefer to have a clear and unambiguous way to prove it.
Because, if you read the Federalist papers, you'll realize that the federal government was intended to have essentially no contact with the lives of the citizens, only with state governments. The average citizen was supposed to be able to go his entire life without even knowing or caring what the fed.gov was doing.
Anyway, you very, very much need to read the Constitution.
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
Yeah, that's certainly the cop out the fed.gov is using to sidestep the whole problem that they're trying to do something they have no legal authority to do...but you and I both know it amounts to a mandate. How many states have managed to stay off the fed.gov teat well enough to not have to cave to federal highway funding requirements?
Want to bet that federal highway funds will be tied to this if there's any indication that states are deliberately not complying?
Feh.
Regarding security versus liberty, I couldn't agree more. What's really depressing, though, is the Big Lie nature of the whole thing. It might not be so frustrating if we actually were getting security at the cost of liberty. But the real crime is we're not; we're pissing away our liberty at an ever-increasing rate, and we've got nothing to show for it (or at least, nothing even close to equivalent value).
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
Im not an American but whats with all this hiding laws in other bills bullshit? Surely this is a most weaselly and below the belt tactic? Why is this accepted in anyway? Why does no-one automatically cry foul and make sure whoever did it looses all trust and respect? I can understand why you cant treat it as a hostage taking and automatically vote down any bill that's had something dodgy tacked on - obviously people would use that as a tool to get rid of bills but surely this sort of thing can be controlled or shunned out of practice? How does it work?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
As it stands now lack of state issued ID is almost a defacto guilty until proven innocent offense. As a perfect example, a few years ago I was on vacation at a beachfront hotel, One evening I was sitting out on the lounge chairs watching the sunset with a group of half a dozen or so strangers. There was typical limited casual conversation going on, one of the guys there was sipping a beer, and one of the women was drinking a glass of wine. A police officer pulls up on an ATV and starts asking for ID's from those that were drinking. The woman who appeared to be about 30 years old pulled her drivers license out from her purse. The guy with the beer was not so lucky, he looked a bit younger and was wearing a bathing suit, he said his ID was up in the hotel room. So the police officer spent the next 10-15 minutes disturbing out peaceful view of the sunset by asking this young guy all sorts of questions (Name, address, SSN, etc) then asked the entire group of people to not leave while he radioed this this information in. About 20 minutes later the police had looked up this guys drivers license, radioed back a description, etc. and confirmed that he was 25 years old.
Ike
I've written about non-compliance as a solution to the REAL ID Act.
Fortunately the act was written so states could decline to comply, and not have to deal with losing funding (which is unavailable to help states comply anyway.)
As I point out, on a day to day basis most people don't need a federally accepted ID card. It's cheaper for the states to tell people who need a federal ID card to just get a passport (which about 25% of Americans already have.)
If worse comes to worst, the occasionaly traveller can just travel ID-less. The airline will decide what to do with the ID card, and if it's not accepted, the passenger will become a selectee (which is the normal procedure for a passenger without ID.)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's a good thing that bad guys would never get a job at the agency handling all that information and get access to those databases.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Despite the fact that relatively sound and effective improvements to driver's license security had already been implemented as part of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
The only "improvements" to license registration I've seen in West Virginia are stupid and ineffective. Law-abiding citizens need an act of Congress to get a license but all a terrorist has to do is forge a couple more documents. I imagine other states that made changes aren't much better.
Rob
Trying to be funny I hope...
The criminals that committed the bombings in Londen were all British citizen, border checks would not have helped any.
Even the 9/11 criminals entered the US quite legally.
Save for making these criminals unacceptable in their own community only good old fashioned criminal investigations and undercover work can help us.
The proposed law has a completely different goal.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
SS numbers werent suiposed to be a form of ID, the way the old laws are written up, its hard to do it.
Plus, all the old fogies that remember it will go "HA! I knew you were gonna do it to us" when in fact they allready have done it to us.
If you resist reading what you disagree with, how will you ever acquire deeper insights into your own beliefs?
AC SaidIf I am taking a flight from somewhere, and some screeners find cocaine in a bag of a fellow passenger, I would hope that they raise a red flag.
The drug laws are stupid. One of the most toxic substances is completely legal (Alcohol) and yet, something as benign as pot will get you sent away for years.
And let make this point: How would a drug jeoperdise your safety? I don't give a shit if a drug smuggler is on the plane because he is of no harm. If you want to give up your liberty for some reason or laws that are made by ignorant people - go ahead. I refuse!
I would like to note that within the FBI Hoover building in DC are tons of fingerprint card records, and according to agents whom I worked with, there, they regularly catch people (agents) stealing information, which of course results in their being fired.
Point being, that among those with a power complex, the bastions of power are very attractive, and the call of abuse of power is also very strong.
If we have such a database, its very existance will ensure that it is broken into. Therefore, I take strong exception to your phrase, "If it breaks".
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Thus, the Federal Government has no legal powers that are not explicitly set forth in the Constitution.
Check out the Necessary and Proper clause. This is used to justify almost all of the expansion of the federal government from its original, limited role.
Not saying I agree in this circumstance, but really... where does it say in the constitution that the federal government can have education and energy policies? Or spy on their own people?
for the trans folk like me. I was born male, and transitioned to living as a woman 12 years ago. I've had some surgery, and lots of hormones, and have finally come to terms with life in-between. I really don't need any more surgery to be happy, and that's the whole point of the treatment for gender dysphoria.
By some judges, I'm legally female. By others, nothing I'll ever do will make me female. I look feminine enough that even nurses do a double-take upon seeing my Social Security card which says I'm male.
My ID currently has my legal name, my pretty femmme picture, and says I'm female. What will my "real" ID say? And what bathroom must I use when out? Would I cause a stir by using the men's room, when I haven't been "read" as male in 6 years?
I may not survive the Real ID.
Lemon curry?
1. The Federal government has no provision in the Constitution in order to force anyone to carry ID. When I fly, I still refuse to show my ID to any government agency and the TSA couldn't do anything about it.
2. For those who intend to mention it, the commerce clause was intended to keep the STATES from hurting trade. It was never meant to allow the Federal government any power to tax, regulate, mandate or require.
3. The entire Federal government is unconstitutional. Every officer that takes an oath to uphold the Constitution has broken that oath. I believe this is possibly treason, and the penalty for treason should be public hanging if found guilty.
4. I'm finished with this mess. If you're ready to take steps to get yourself out of the authoritarian rut, cancel your bank accounts, switch from a salaried employee to a 1099 contractor, stop using credit cards and loans, sell your house and buy something without a mortgage, store your wealth in gold and silver and work to start your own company. Get out from under the hands of these bastards.
5. If the day comes that the dollar crashes, I'll be taking names for anyone who wants to toil on my land in trade for food and shelter.
Seriously, though, this is just nuts. I refuse my ID to everyone already (except private companies who request it for me to enter their private property). In Illinois we have laws requiring me to show my ID when I am pulled over for a traffic stop -- I refuse. I don't even roll the window down more than a crack. I tell the (possibly fake) officer that I refuse to speak, and if there is a problem he can call another squad car in to arrest me and charge me with a crime. This is the proper way to deal with speeding tickets (and I've been arrested on a ticket only once in a dozen times in a dozen years -- and the officer's boss let me go immediately).
Stop helping the system! Stop using their services. Just walk away. Life is much better when you're free.
The Real ID Act was originally part of the House Intelligence bill in the previous 108th Congress. The provisions were yanked because of the problems it posed especially at the insistence of the Senate. It came back in the current session of Congress. It was passed by the House without discussion or debate. There were no committee hearings either. The Senate refused to act upon especially how it would usurp states rights. The House decided to attach to a must pass appropriations bill to fund the Iraq troops and Tsunami relief fund. The Senate removed the provisions but the bill went to conference. The House prevailed.
Now, people are realizing this montrosity. Here are a couple of ways to get rid of this bill. First is a grassroots coalition to encourage the Senate to unilaterally attach the repeal language to any and all bills coming over from the House. A good place would be to hold the PATRIOT ACT hostage. The Senate could refuse to act on it unless the House goes along to repeal the Real ID Act. The PATRIOT ACT was temporarily extended.
The second way is contact our state legislators and governors and ask them to refuse to go along with this. If all 50 states refuse to sign on to the Real ID Act, it would be hard to stop commerce because Congress would not want to bankrupt the airlines.
What is Real ID Act about ? It would require states to follow the Federal Gov't prescription on how Driver's Licenses are issued such as linking driver databases, checking background information on license applicants such as birth certificates, proof of residence, etc. If a state decides to not go along, then citizens from that state would not be allowed to board aircraft, go into Federal buildings. Even more, the driver databases would allow hackers and marketers easy access for identity theft and some states with strong privacy laws would have their databases accessed from states with weak privacy laws.
Last of all, guess who was the sponsor ? House Judiciary Chairman Francis James Sensenbrenner from Wisconsin. The same nitwit who is pushing to close the analog "loophole" for video and music. The people of Wisconsin should remove him from office through the ballot box. His Democrat opponent should be supported with money or whatever means. I am a Republican, a conservative one at that. People like Sensenbrennerare country club Republicans who originally opposed President Reagan.