Slashdot Mirror
Deadline For Saying "No" To National ID
cnet-declan writes "If you don't like the idea of a federalized ID card, you have only have an hour left to let Homeland Security know your thoughts: the deadline to file comments on the Real ID Act is 5:00 pm EDT on Tuesday. Probably the best place to do that is a Web site created by an ad hoc alliance called the Privacy Coalition (they oppose the idea, but if you're a big Real ID fan you can use their site to send adoring comments too). Alternatively, Homeland Security has finally seen fit to give us an email address that you can use to submit comments on the Real ID Act. Send email to oscomments@dhs.gov with 'Docket No. DHS-2006-0030' in the Subject: line. Here's some background on what the Feds are planning."
Is it helpful for non USA citizens to also voice their disquiet?
Ian D. K. Kelly
idkk Consultancy Ltd.
"Quality through Thought"
to have the NSA and FBI investigate you to find out why you have something to hide.
You sir are an idiot. National ID will be a one stop shop for identity theft. Plain and simple. Please move along.
What real harm a national ID can do. I'm not trying to troll, I've just never really "gotten" why a single centralized ID is more dangerous than a large number of different IDs. Would anyone care to explain? Politely and collectedly without resorting to words like "sheeple?"
When the idea of national ID cards were suggested to Reagan it was received negatively. He responded by sarcastically suggesting tattooing bar codes on everybody's heads. That killed the issue during his administration.
Considering the amount of surveillance they now carry out on US citizens, I suspect the already know your thoughts.
And if you're not being watched now, you will be if you sign that petition, you troublemaker.
Oh no... it's the future.
Its obvious that anyone expressing their discontent with this new ID is affiliated with Al-Qaeda (© 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 ONI/CIA/DISA). On a serious note though, with all of the data breaches, etc., what's the worst that could happen. This place has gone to hell in a handbasket since 2000. I see no reason to avoid it lest I want to be thrown on the no fly list because I didn't want this card... S'what will end up happening like it or not...
Infiltrated dot Net
Sure... you want to be ID'd where ever you go, automatically, with who knows what information available to the teller, toll both operator, merchant, insurance agent, and anyone who hacks into the system just because you walked close to them and your RFID burped. You want someone to be able to clone your RFID tag and walk through a crime scene a few times, thus "establishing" that you were at the scene of the crime. Sure you do. You're all about being identified, right?
That's why you post anonymously.
Sometimes I wonder if we ought to take a hint from the Spartans.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
If you are rushing, check out the EFF's page on the Real ID act. They have a summary and a sample letter. Join them while you are there!
If there is no national id card, then what will happen is that a "virtual" national id card will be created. It could take a number of forms, from collecting drivers license ID information from the states, to building biometric databases.
The thing is "Papers, please" is a quaint, obsolete phrase. In fact the problem is not people looking at your ID, the problem is that event being recorded in a database to produce a picture of your movements.
If there were a national id that was secure and could be validated without hooking up to a national database, there would actually be less government intrusion into our privacy than if they data mine information from drivers databases and track you secretly.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Is it kind of sad when you are afraid to submit an email in fear of being added to some kind of database of people who don't want this? As an American it makes me kinda sad when in this day of data gathering and mining, it's worrisome to voice ones opinion.
With all the damage the existence of the United States Passport has done to our diversity and prosperity...
If everyone went out and got a passport, this would be a non-issue, so that raises the question for me: have those people complaining the loudest about this ever held one? It seems scarcely any different and I don't know many people with valid passports who get entirely big-brother about it. It's just a global reality and not a terribly ominous one at that.
Do you think you're helping?
I would like to hear actual arguments. Research papers. Something that suggests that a national system would be worse or harder to defend from privacy invasion or theft. I'm certainly more than ready to listen to such arguments, but who did you expect to convince with this?
"Oh gee, if some Anonymous Coward dick is going to call me an idiot on Slashdot, I guess I would be a fool to disagree with him..."
The giant unified database of all our electronic records ( bank, phone records, internet logs, credit card purchases, medical records, court records, magazine subscriptions etc. etc. ) was officially killed in 2003, but what happened is that all of the separate functions were farmed out to smaller, separate programs. Wikipedia says "An unknown number of TIA's functions have been merged under the codename 'Topsail'."
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Nobody likes this... save for a few corporate shills that make a living on blogs, pretending that people demand this nonsense.
There is no groundswell of support for these things -- just a Corporate media that downplays the numbers of American's who protest, and fail to mention that one Bus brought all those "concerned citizens" to Florida to prevent the recount in Florida in 2000.
This is just more of the creeping fascism in America. Just like the "No Child Left Behind" just served to profit one testing company, that had a lot of Bush family money in it.
Now this will be used to track protesters. Why do you think that the FBI has Quakers on it's list to spy on and not violent hate groups?
This is getting really ugly. When not dodging investigations into corruption, evil and vote-rigging, our administration finds excuses to extend their power and intrusiveness into our lives. I feel like they are herding us, and by the time everyone wakes up -- there won't be much we can do.
By the way -- I seriously doubt sending an email to HS will do any good. They already bury office supplies in the desert to keep their budget up -- does anyone know any function of that group beyond being a place to give cronies jobs?
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
1. The 4th Amendment states you have a right "to be secure in your papers". That means squat if, by looking at one card for any reason, a gov't bureaucrat can pull up darn near ANYTHING about you. Does your participation in Social Security really have anything to do with being pulled over for speeding? Are your travel records really necessary for borrowing a book from the library? Does pulling health records really need cross-linking with when you got a driver's license? Is your credit rating really needed to board an airplane?
... YOU CAN'T EVEN BUY BEER!
2. Sure, they'll promise to only use relevant data appropriately. Right. Governments do not have a good history of using such pervasive data without oppression (up to and including genocide).
3. The more ID is needed to function in society, the more valuable IDs become. A national ID becomes a one-stop-shop for ID theft. Crack one card, and I become you.
4. Without the national ID, you can't participate in government. You can't enter a courthouse, visit your Congressman, etc. because you won't be able to even enter the building - no ID, no entry.
5. Ultimately a national ID is a license to exist. No license shown on demand? You're detained until your ID is found, one is created, or you get removed from society. The fact that you exist means nothing; no card, no you.
6. Corrupted data screws you over. Your file gets marked "deceased"? You're officially dead, and no amount of "but I'm standing here ranting at you!" won't help. At least with diverse cards & databases you can argue "8 out of 9 government databases say I'm still alive; please correct yours!"
7. Pervasiveness. No card, you can't function. Without that one centralized ID card, which you don't get unless everything is in order, you can't drive, fly, ride, vote, own property, get married, file suit, work,
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
I happen to believe Real ID is a very good idea, and that it would make society better.
We already have national IDs in the form of passports, Social Security cards, etc.
I'm all for cracking down on states to make their IDs more secure and lessen counterfeits. I don't believe our privacy would change markedly than what we have today.
Verifying someone's identity is a lot tougher then just issuing them a card, in fact it could even backfire by giving people a false confidence in the authenticity of documents that are based on faulty information.To see the drawbacks of real id I'd take a look at http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/05/rea
I stole this Sig
...lemme tell you where it leads to.
In my country it's mandatory to carry a (real, state issued) ID wherever you go. No matter what, when a cop stops you and asks for your ID, you have to be able to prove that you're you. And they can do that whenever, whereever and for whatever reason they want. Failure to comply results in an arrest.
If you want that, don't write. It's what you'll get.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Wow -- stopping identity theft would be very easy -- without an expensive national ID card, and making everyone a tracked suspect.
With our SSN, we could all create a private key. By using something like the credit card networks, ID boxes could be put in stores -- or wherever you wanted to identify a person.
A person would enter their SSN into the box. They would use their "check pin" -- with the Check pin and the public SSN, they would get a response code which would verify that this was a secure connection (whatever they choose to have their response be) -- then they would enter in their password. The Vendor, would just receive a time-stamped verification that said; John Doe is authorized to act on behalf of John Doe -- coupled with a picture ID of any sort.
If anyone else uses your SSN -- they don't have the password. If someone gets that -- you go through a simple face-to-face visit at a bank or some authorized ID place, and submit a new password.
>> Wow. Gee --look! I solved the whole crisis, with just using telephone lines and a new system to just add a password to the SSN system and use common Public/Private Key techniques. A thousand Slashdotters could solve this dilemma -- so how come we have such an insipid, expensive, stupid National ID from BushCo and the Poodle-fascist in England? Perhaps we just need to jump ahead and get chipped or barcoded. Then only authorized criminals will get to steal our retirement funds.
A National ID does nothing to resolve someone stealing your ID. Does nothing to prevent anything -- but it does a great job of keeping track of the average joe, or allowing an overbearing government to oppress people. Just like that stinking "do not fly list."
I have yet to see one example -- even ONE, where this administration has done something that benefitted me. They take great pride and probably pass around the cigars every time the come up with another clever way to cheat Americans. I would sooner trust the random stranger on the train than ANYONE in this criminal enterprise in Washington.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Yes, thus showing the abstract value that anonymity brings to the table, and not just on slashdot. There are parallels here to anonymity in meat-space as well; an anonymous member of a protest group (in order not to blow one's standing in the community); an anonymous withdrawal of a book on anarchism or bomb-making because you want to understand the threats, but don't want to have the ATF come visit you with handcuffs; an anonymous objection to the will of the masses with regard to any number of topics, such as religion, sexuality, the drug war, etc. Anonymity is valuable. That's the darned point! RealID is a program designed to strip anonymity from us, and that is one (of many) reasons it is a bad thing.
I was debating the poster's opinion. I took the post seriously, and I responded with what I considered to be content that rebutted the posted opinion. So what is your objection to this? Does "embrace" mean that I have to agree? I don't think so!
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
This sort of legislation is really annoying. It was coupled with Tsunami relief. What, is the President going to look like a jerk and not grant money for relief, just to avoid this act? Like everything he does, the Bush Haters would have twisted it around and blamed it all him anywho. Well, they will anyways, but this is not Bush's fault.
Bearded Dragon
Yes, and Poindexter is still assembling a huge database on Americans -- as they've privatized the Total Information Awareness gambit.
... did you agree to let the government, or bank lose your data on a laptop recently? No? Did you ask them to sell the data -- the bank can't do it by law, but there is no provision against the government doing it. What about false information?
IF you wanted to blacklist someone, you might enter anything into a database about that person. Everyone paying attention to how much fun we've had with the Credit Score companies and how long it took to force them to tell us what the damn score was without spending $40 for the privilege of correcting their errors?
And, who is going to bet me $10 that you won't be allowed to know what data gets on your ID card? As well as medical health, and most like genetic data, you might even have job history, traffic accidents -- think of all the baggage a corporation would want to have about you. All this data gets sold right now to private corporations -- did we vote on that? Please, by all means google it. Yes, the Bush administration takes info from your tax forms, or from Homeland Security, and sells it to private companies that do things like identify issues for politicians to campaign on -- or probably anything someone will pay for.
I'm sure future employers will consult the National ID card when they hire you. What sort of information will be on that card? Well
No, the national ID card isn't to identify you -- it's to track you, and to build a database on you. It's to make you a citizen at the level that they think you deserve to be. What happens to a traveling salesman who gets on the "Do Not Fly" list?
It might be your SAT score or it might be some government information that decides what college you or your kids go to. "Not corporate friendly" might keep you out of Yale. I'm sure my voting record would be useful, so that they could keep me out of Political debates -- who needs a loyalty oath when you can actually determine if someone is the "right sort."
You may call me paranoid. I just think if you don't imagine what the abuse could be -- you are being naive.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
To be fair, I'll take off my tinfoil hat. Let's say that nothing bad comes of this. What good comes of it? We've already got state ID's and several other forms of ID that are considered to be valid and secure forms of identification. Why would I want to have my taxes go to having another one instead of something useful (not that I really think that money would otherwise go to something useful).
The Republican party has already floated the idea of using the National ID as a voter ID to help with their voter fraud efforts (even though I believe the law currently forbids this. They'd just change the law). I don't know whether that scares you or not.
Having to have a birth certificate as ID is my biggest opposition to it. If I loose my birth certificate I will have to get a new one from a hospital in a city that no longer exists. The hospital or the city. I'd like to think that they pulled all of my records out from under the 6 feet of volcanic ash, but somehow I doubt it. And I don't want to spend 17 hours in the DMV explaining that to someone.
You are correct in that nothing MAY happen, and this MAY just end up being a boring ass driver's license that triples the amount of time I have to spend at the DMV. But that would be ignoring history.
Want to stop the Real ID act? Have a proposal about what to do instead of it?
Um. First you'll have to explain just what problem this attempting to solve. I've never seen a consistent explanation of the purpose of this act to begin with.
1) Because you need the old password, and you sit down at some place like a bank -- or anywhere authorized, and show them photo IDs, mail -- all the stuff you do now when you lose an ID and go to Motor Vehicles. This is at least 10 times more secure ... so what's the beef?
Why can't the bank authentication be faked? Well, if I were faking being John Doe -- I'd be in a bank or somewhere getting my photo and finger print and hoping there were no other John Doe screaming about identity theft... and the bank has a few Million in the vault and expensive property -- so I doubt they'd want to make money on fake IDs.
2) That's the point of the "check code" -- the handshake in private/public key incryption. I punch my ID in a box that is authorized and hooked up to a phone line -- just like we do right now, billions of times a day, with credit cards. When I enter in my SSN, I get something back like "Ouch!" -- because that's what I set up as my "check key." Now, however someone wants to create the authorization scheme to verify that box -- they are still going to have to intercept incrypted codes for anyone who's ID they are going to want to steal. I could get very detailed but I could say with a GPS, authorization procedures, and a phone line -- these ID boxes could be pretty hard to steel -- you could authorize them by day, and for one location on the planet.
OK, now that I saw "Ouch!" on the screen -- I know it is an authorized ID system I'm hooked up to. Unless someone has intercepted my last transaction with an authorized device, and is running an elaborate scam -- this is at least many times more work than what it takes to steal a bank pin on my Debit card -- which is harder to steal than my SSN right now. So now I can send my password that goes to the ID system, and then they wire back to the Vender an authorization like "John Doe Approved" and a transaction number -- just like credit card companies use -- a time stamp and hash that could be used to prove later that I, John Doe, really did buy that crappy leather jacket so pay up!
3) Yes, it doesn't reduce tracking. But I would want such a system to be State-based authorities. Not Federal. I don't have a problem with a company like VISA being an authorized ID System. The point is; someone needs to know that I'm John Doe -- if they are wrong, VISA is going to lose some money. THAT sort of privatization is fine with me. In the National ID scheme; huge government beuaracracy authorizes cards, but outsources to one politically friendly company. I guess it's pretty much that I know BushCo will screw it up, and it will cost us a lot of money, and only benefit friendly crooks. What else is new? But any ID system needs to only provide a reasonable guarantee to Company X or Person Y that I am John Doe. VISA has a vested interest in Credit Cards and would be financially damaged trying to screw me over -- see, they have something to lose! Not one appointed company made for the sole purpose of privatizing and keeping he system forever from oversight.
4) Um, because my password can be changed. If someone steals my ID Number -- how do I change my unique ID like a SSN? Everything is based on some sort of fixed tracking number in every database ever used. The password can change and be used merely to authorize that I am John Doe using such and such SSN. It's only a slight inconvenience like a bank pin -- you don't need it everytime you shop -- you just use this INSTEAD of your SSN. Like when you take our a loan, or apply for that fricken' blockbuster video card where they think I'm going to trust them and 20 part-time teenagers with my SSN to rent a video.
So, in short -- you don't use your SSN to go shopping now. You use your credit card and occassionally your drivers license. In fact, you can even use CASH. McDonalds does not need to know I'm John Doe in order to sell me a hamburger. They just need my money. If VISA wants to do a better job of securing money -- then let THEM solve it. I don't want a MORE PERFECT ID system -- I just
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
There is no problem. They want to create an extra layer of red tape, exactly like Homeland Security. They don't want to streamline state id systems; they want to leave all the flaws in place, but report to a Big Daddy computer. You've hit the nail on the head. Real ID is a solution in search of a non-existent problem.
The real problem of the "Real Id Act" isn't that its a national ID card. It is a standardization for all states. However, what it could become is frightening.
Its that there isn't a clear limit of what states can put on the card. There isn't necessarily a database per card, but thats up to states to decide. And it is a major stepping stone to a national ID card.
And yes, that is a problem for ID theft, and it is a problem for a police state. It would be so simple to say "Where is your card? I'm sorry.. you don't have it? Please step out of the car, ma'am, you're under arrest for suspected terrorism."
Honestly, its that easy.
Oh yeah, and yes Social Security numbers are tied to the card. Not listed ON card, but directly linked.
Praise His Noodliness. RAmen.
I listed two. But you might have missed them or think they are common place enough that they arn't a problem.
A. Visas are granted with little or no thought. Can you pretend you're going to college? You can probably get a Visa. Technically fixed now, but having actual rules about them wouldn't be a bad thing.
B. ID is becoming to the point where different states have completely different rules. Why not have a standardized rule that says if you have these X pieces of identification? You can get an ID. If not you can't. Instead I've seen every single state that I've lived in (4 in the last 5 years) has different laws. 2 of them didn't require proof of residency, One required just my old ID which they just looked at and assumed it's ok, they didn't even scrutinize the picture (and they don't have access to that state's database so they definitely didn't pull up the database to look at the official picture).
One state I went to allowed you to use ID from certain states... why? Because those states had "adequate" security measures. I didn't have that state's license and I had to go through the official process of proving who I was, which was easy.
So why should we have such a variety in the ways we gain ID and have states having different levels of security but everyone assuming that the two drivers licenses from different states are both the same level of proof of your identity, when even the states themselves know certain states are more secure? Oh right, because it's not a problem....
I'm not trying to tell you Real ID is right, but at the same time let's find a way to make the law better than yelling about it and trying to get it completely thrown out, which just won't happen.
You're right. My only alternative idea to reducing freedoms is 'leave things the way they are until we come up with a good idea'. I wish I had that good idea right now, but at least I'm opposed to making things worse. 'You don't have an idea on how to improve things so don't complain about our idea to make things worse' seems like a really, really weak position to me.
So, we've posted a hundred complaints about Real ID. If they're legitimate, it's important that we consider them. When the proponents of an idea object to critical analysis, that's a strong sign that it's a bad idea.
Tell that to those who voted in the first time of their lives where the ballot had more than one option.
Wow, a whole 12 million Iraqis voted. Out of a population of more than 60 Million that's only 1 in 5 that voted.
How many countries has the US "liberated" that didn't have oil lately??
Grenada, Panama, Kuwait, Bosnia, nearly Haiti, and, of course, Afghanistan. Of course, this list only goes back to the late 80's, but you did say, "lately".
Panama? Who did the US liberate Panama from? The same person the US supported to begin with. Kuwait? Kuwait does have oil for one thing. A second is that Kuwait was not then and is not now a democracy. It is a sheikdom, ruled by a Sheikh. Haiti? The US used Papa Doc as a bulwark against communism. He is the one Haiti needed to be liberated from. Afghanistan? Though it doesn't produce oil, Afghanistan is building oil pipelines. However now the Taliban, whom Bush gave $43 millions in taxpayer money to, are regaining strength and power.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Yes, it is. He's the executive, he could have vetoed this if he found anything in there he did not support. Apparently he did not, and neither did the legislators who voted in favor of it. It's their fault, too.
That's the last time I run code posted in somebody's sig...
Which is really kind of funny, because (a) I wrote this and every time I point it out, I don't get mod points for many months in a row, and (b) one of the editors regularly and systematically mods down my posts, easily detected when I have a series of posts over several stories, over several days, sometimes highly rated, sometimes just at 1, then over the course of five minutes, I'll lose 10-15 points across multiple stories; clearly someone with more than 5 points to "spend" has had themselves a little "abuse party." As the "editors" brag, they have unlimited mod points, and they aren't afraid to use them.
Personally, I browse at -1 because there aren't enough positive mod points to raise up all the reasonable posts and because there are tons of good posts that get moderated down as a matter of commentary, rather than because they are actually bad posts. As far as I am concerned the moderation system just barely manages to make itself felt as commentary, less effectively than digg's does, and it is absolutely useless as a criteria of which messages to read.
Let me say, however, that I take your comment as a complement and I thank you for saying so.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Seriously, there are reasons to support a National ID. I could take that argument up separately. But what I want to comment on is this. Isn't it a little bit disturbing, that among those of us who are opposed to the idea, there is a feeling of intimidation about registering dissent with the Department of Homeland Security? It reminds me eerily of a teacher querying a fourth grade class, "is there anyone here who objects to saying the Pledge of Allegiance?, If so raise your hand and you may wait out in the hallway, while the rest of us say the pledge."