Slashdot Mirror
Some States Say National ID Cards 'Make Life Easier'
VE3OGG writes "Some places, like Maine, have outright rejected the idea of a nationally mandated ID card amid privacy, legal and security concerns. On the other side of the fence some states, such as California and New Jersey, have said that they welcome the National ID card and that it will make 'life easier'. One New Jersey official said 'All you are getting in e-government for the most part are things that don't require strong two-factor identification,' the official said referring to security that requires something beyond a user name and password. 'But as we move forward and start to deliver more and more complicated services, I think that people for the most part will want to know their government has implemented strong measures [with National ID cards]'."
Modern politics is just too bizarre. The Republicans used to be the ones who were for less government involvement in an individuals life, then the Democrats appeared to have taken up that flag, but now with the National ID card (papers please), both parties seem to be endorsing this movement.
.50 cal rifles illegal, they will be able to track purchases of ammunition and deliver jack-booted thugs to your door to take you away, or at the very least, prohibit you from doing any business across state lines or within states that ban those rifles if politicians decide to play that game against individuals. You can also kiss any anonymity away when dealing with private corporations as the National ID card will enable any and all transactions through banks, individuals and more to be closely monitored.
For all you extreme left wing whakos start hollering, think about this: How much longer will it be until we have to present a National ID card to take out a loan, open a bank account, cross state lines, and more? Already it is being proposed that you will not be able to board a plane unless you have a National ID card. So, what about those who can afford their own planes? Will they be allowed more anonymity than those with fewer resources? What about purchasing items like automobiles? Those who can afford to pay cash for an automobile in its entirety would be able to do so while those who have to take out a loan are again restricted to using a bank and thus the National ID card again. How about healthcare? Those that can afford to pay for services completely will not have to worry about health care insurance and therefore will not be tracked.
Before any of you ultra-right wing neocon folks start bashing me for this, how about realizing that a National ID card will essentially enable all sorts of purchase related tracking to take place. You can now welcome federally mandated and controlled tracking and access to guns. For example, when other states decide to buy into the fear and make
What happened to common sense and the political middle road?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I have no problem with a centralized two-factor authentication card.
I have SERIOUS problems with the "use your SSN for everything" society we have now.
Give me a card that I have the ability to password/passcode protect, with a physical chip in it.
Oh, and make sure it requires a friggin warrant to get the "logs" of its use. Warrantless searches make me sad.
And the USA is fast becoming a Police State:
l
http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/PoliceState.htm
... to at least include a picture.
What was that? You managed to get some service(s) without giving out your Social Security number?
Well, that was just plain UnAmerican!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
If you mean, by criminalizing all civil libertarians like myself who would refuse such an ID card, yes, I suppose it's much easier.
When are we going to officially change our flag to red white and black as it is increasingly being designated?
BLAUSCHEIM BITTE!!!
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
--"But as we move forward and start to deliver more and more complicated services, I think that people for the most
part will want to know their government has implemented strong measures [with National ID cards]'."
I don't think we want more and more complicated services nor do we need them. We don't want to be tracked,
x-rayed, data-mined or subpoenaed by email. Actually we want less interference in our lives.
34 States have turned down a national ID card.
If you were to dig down, I think you'd find that the level of resistance to the initiative is directly proportional to the cost of complying. Those states that have more modernized digital systems that they could more easily adapt to comply are going to be the ones that resist least.
There is an element of states' rights here, and the federal government has become larger and more intrusive into the afairs of the states than the original framers of the Constitution intended. The original colonies, when they formed a federal republic, were very conscious of reigning in the power of the national government and how much influence it could exert over the states. Over time, the independence and self-determination of the states has been constricted. So for some states, this could be a line in the sand over principle. But for most, I suspect, the real issue is expense.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
Seems like the answer to getting something through Government bureaucracies is play on the fears of others. Don't worry about your privacy rights we are careful not to trample on them (I'll believe it when I see it as a law). But if you don't let us do this national card with 'strong' security we can't ensure you identity won't be stolen. Your choice. I'm pretty sure the states can implement the same security measures as this card can implement. Not to mention two factor authentication is the end all of security counter measures. All you are really doing unless you get into biometrics (which only work in person biometric devices over a network are just as easy to send false data as a password or whatnot) is adding a second password, if they can get around the first they can get around the second. Ma'am enter your password, ma'am insert your usb token which can be captured just like any other password. Etc... This isn't the best explanation of two factor problems but you get the picture. BTW, the two factor solution will be a proprietary one from Diebold which will be used to secure your vote placed at Diebold e-voting paperless voting machines in 2010
http://www.schneier.com/essay-034.html
This is probably a point that's been made elsewhere, but the most disturbing thing about the National ID is not just that it's an egregious encroachment of our freedoms, privacy, and right to stay out of federal and commercial databases, but that it's all these things AND absolutely useless as any kind of security check. All ID card systems assume that identity proves security, that if I appear to be who I say I am, that means that I am no longer a security risk. This is just security theater. Even under the National ID system, there's nothing preventing forgery or fraudulent usage of the base documents used to get an ID card (social security card, birth cert, whatever). There's no reason Achmed bin Terrorist can't roll up to the National ID store with some real documents that, for example, aren't his but also haven't been used to generate another National ID, and get a card for himself.
There's also no reason to assume that, unique among all other ID cards, the National ID will be unforgeable, or that even if it is, the staff employed to verify that an ID card is legit will do their jobs. Government employees are the lowest common denominator in the best case, and ID checking unskilled zombies aren't likely to be any better.
Identity is not security, and LACK of identity is not a lack of security.
Gang members, mafia, etc. don't typically buy their guns from licensed vendors. They either steal them or buy them under the counter from someone else.
THis is one of the main gripes a lot of Canadians have against the federal gun registry, which, after over 10 years and BILLIONS of dollars has yet to be fully implemented, and has done nothing to lessen gun crimes.
They've now started adding biometrics to the physical ID card. Fingerprint instead of pin code. The idea is to use it when boarding an aircraft or buying groceries etc with essentially no need for human involvement.
The question however isn't if it makes life easier or not. The relevant question is if the cost associated with it is worth it. Having a permanent unique identifier attached that can be traced, well, anywhere is not a good thing if governments or corporations abuse it. It requires privacy laws and trust that the privacy laws will be respected. Ultimately it boils down to the question: do you trust the government not to screw you over and to protect you from corporate interests? My own answers are perhaps and probably. Right now there are some worrying ideas being floated by the politicians about wiretapping and Internet traffic sniffing so my first answer might change.
Still, at this point they haven't dramatically screwed up - I mean like a patriot act level of breach of trust. So right now I'm agnostic about how good this system is.
It is in fact convenient and efficient with an axiomatic foundation of trust that can be used for communication and exchange of services at many levels of society. One just has to hope that the foundation isn't rotten.
If implemented properly how is a National ID a bad thing? Before you start warming up your keyboard to start flaming me with your rants from one side or the other think about it objectively for a second. A few points to consider:
"But what about Big Brother?"
Does anyone here honestly think that any Federal Law Enforcement Agency can not access all of the information tied to your Drivers License?
"What about my privacy?"
Once again, how does this lessen your privacy? You willfully submit all of this information to your State to obtain an ID card or drivers license. Once again do you honestly think the Feds can not access this already?
"What about my guns?"
Once again when you purchase that weapon depending on the type and or State you reside in, you willfully fork over all sorts of personal information to the government.
Ok now lets think about convenience for a few minutes. Having lived all over the Country for work I have had to switch my drivers license from State to State. I moved from one State to another and getting my new license was a breeze $15 and 10 minutes of my time, however when I moved back to my home State a few years later I was forced to pay a large fee and retake the written exam over again; then wait 6 weeks for the new one, even though my out of State license was valid. What if you never had to do that again?
What if when a police officer makes a traffic stop on an out of state vehicle he was actually able to, with a high degree of certainty, identify the person? There are numerous accounts in law enforcement of wanted criminals going unnoticed because a small local agency was unable to identify the person.
States who object to this aren't trying to protect your privacy or security, they are protecting the revenue that they generate through licensing fees. If you disagree with that, please before you rip on that point I encourage you to take a walk over to the DMV and grab a copy of the fee schedule. Look closely at the number of various fees and the amounts. All of those fees are set by each individual state. A unified system would also mean level fees across all states, which would be set by the Feds and not the individual States.
Just a little food for thought...
Is anyone else weirded out that a piece of paper Certifying your Birth, your License to Drive and your Social Security card are the main means of identifying you? It's all cobbled together in a strange and nasty web of connected requirements. I need all three to get a Passport, but then I can't use my Passport to get a Driver's license.
Now logically you should be able to get one from the others.
But I digress.
I know we all fear the national ID number... but we already have it. If you have a passport, it's that. If you have a SSN, it's that. Driver's license? These are all ID. If you Nationalize ID's, then we can put limits on what they can and can't be used for, but right now these other numbers are unprotected. Take your SSN and post it as a reply and you'll see what I mean.
Time to feed the troll, we all enjoy it. :)
The government should never be trusted!
George Washington (1732 - 1799)
Government Like Fire
Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force.
Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
It is not the governments job to ID me, tag me, or give a flying F**K what I do, provided I do not infringe on others rights.
What is the government's job?
Try this
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed.
The government's job is to secure our rights, not to remove them!
So, while you accept the ID cards, I do not! While you accept restrictions on your rights (To keep and bear arms), I do NOT! While you accept restrictions on your rights, I resist them! I will continue to resist them tell the day I die.
According to Prevent Genocide International, No other factor [than ID cards] was more significant in facilitating the speed and magnitude of the 100 days of mass killing in Rwanda. About 1 million people butchered.
From the same page:
In Nazi Germany in July 1938, only a few months before Kristallnacht, the infamous "J-stamp" was introduced on ID cards and later on passports. The use of specially marked "J-stamp" ID cards by Nazi Germany preceded the yellow Star of David badges. In Norway, where yellow cloth badges were not introduced, the stamped ID card was used in the identification of more than 750 Jews deported to death camps in Poland.
They also provide a 'nice' table:
Genocide: Nazi Germany (1938-1945), Rwanda (1990-1994)
Mass Expulsion: Ethiopia (Persons with Eritrean affiliation 1998), Bhutan (Lhotshampas, 1991), Vietnam (Hoa ethnic Chinese 1978-1979), France (Alsace-Lorraine 1918-1920)
Forced Relocation: USSR (ethnic Koreans 1937, Volga Germans 1941, Kalmyks, Karachai, 1943, Crimean Tatars, Meshkhetian Turks Chechens, Ingush, Balkars 1944, ethnic Greeks, 1949)
Group Denationalization: Cambodia (ethnic Vietnamese 1993), Myanmar (Rohingya Arakanese 1992), Syria (Kurds 1962)
In regard to the UK cattle tagging ID card system, The Times reported:
David Blunkett, was no better. On the subject of identity cards he once said: No one should fear correct identification. Those words always remind me of one the more distressing details of the Eichmann trial: how he told his executioner that the fate of those killed in the Holocaust was sealed by their answers to the 1939 census on religious background recorded on paper for a Hollerith machine, an early mechanical computer. Quite literally, their cards were marked.
Needless to say, lesser abuses than these are far more common.
The UK system is unbelievably scary. Going far beyond the punchcard Hollerith machine, our ID cards are backed by the National Identity Register, a database designed to merge all government databases and commercial data trails into a personal surveillance dossier that makes 1984 look respectful.
So scared is the Govt of the public finding out about this that they are secretly forcing passport renewers on to this Orwellian database from March 26th.
They are also forcing doctors to betray their patients' confidence and upload your private medical records to another insecure national database, again without telling you.
I'm sorry if you haven't been warned about this before: NO2ID has a budget around 1000 times smaller than the Home Office but you do still have a few weeks to protect yourself. Click the 3 links above and most importantly, read the NO2ID newsletter.
We should fear a government with "underpaid", party-affiliated bribe-susceptible bureaucrats who find it "easy" to access information on citizens far more than any terrorist bogeyman. One is far more likely to have one's life made a living hell by such mouth-breathers transposing a digit than find death at the hands of a foreign zealot (local zealots^Widiots trying to ban Harry Potter books and otherwise interfere with daily living are something entirely different).
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
A Social Security card is not and has never been a form of identification. The card simply shows that a certain name has a certain SSN, it does not show that the person carrying the card is the person named on the card.
Enigma
Close. I think you've actually got it, but I think the question is just a bit more general. Ultimately, it boils down to:
Do you trust the government and any government thereafter to protect you from corporate interests, identity theft, corruption in government (and elsewhere), and the government itself? The answer is almost certainly no, right?
I'm all for a government issued standard ID (even a global standard) if:
-It is opt-in. I mean completely opt-in. You can not get one and your life will just be a little less convenient (like having a university give you an ID number rather than using your social). You can get one, but pick and choose where you use it.
-Some kind of guarantee that the ID will not suffice as the sole evidence of guilt. (E.g. the fact that your ID was used to access an ATM should not, per se, be evidence that you robbed it.)
-Privacy laws are updated such that only first parties have access to any information they gather on you. (Except for law enforcement who _must_ get a warrant.)
Since all of these are probably barring radical social/political change, I say "no thanks" to the convenience offered.