Slashdot Mirror
Biometric Passports Agreed To In EU
An anonymous reader writes "The European Parliament has signed up to a plan to introduce computerized biometric passports including people's fingerprints as well as their photographs, despite criticism from civil liberties groups and security experts who argue that the move is flawed on technical grounds. (Back in 2005 Sweden and Norway began deploying biometric passports.)"
I can't see this one going very far. Several of the most influential EU nations have general elections coming up within a year or two, centralised European power is already under the spotlight because of the way the Constitution^WReform Treaty was handled by diktat, and governments already lost at sea over the economic mess won't want to rock the boat any further.
In the UK, in particular, I suspect the NO2ID anti-ID card campaign will pick this up in about ten seconds. At that point, it will become associated with the National Identity Register and National ID Card biometrics programmes, and become a political suicide pill.
With a bit of luck, it'll finally bring down the catastrophe that is centrally dictated European policy, make us aware that we don't have to jump just because some guy at 1600 said so, and restore a little of the democracy we've had stolen from us in recent years along the way.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Democracy was in Greece millennia ago, not here.
I'm sure the Greek slaves would agree with you.
If voting,be sure to check out these impressive tools to help make an informed choice in the European Parliament elections.
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Campaign-Save_amendment_138_and_Internet_Freedom_from_Council_of_EU#General_Advice
For example can sort by amendment 138, see who was against:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Telecoms_package_directives_1st_reading_details_by_score
I wish ID cards were a political suicide pill. I really don't understand why both main parties are pushing ahead with them come what may.
One of us has got completely the wrong idea here: I thought the Tory lot had given a pretty much black-and-white statement that they would repeal the Identity Card legislation, and had consistently opposed the introduction of all the biometric nonsense from the start.
Yep, here we go: ID cards on the Conservatives' web site is pretty clearly against them.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
AFAIK most european countries have had biometric passports for years. Certainly my (german) passport has an RFID tag with my photo's biometric information on it. More recent passports also include fingerprints.
AFAIK, this is also mandated by the US, for any foreigners wishing to enter the country visa free (visa waiver program countries). A friend from switzerland told me (in 2007), that he was actually allowed to choose whether he wanted a normal passport or a biometric one (enabling travel to the US).
So what is actually new here? It hasn't been EU-wide before? Not that I approve of this or anything, but most EU countries have this implemented already, anyways.
Most European countries already issue biometric passports. US and UK has been pushing really hard on this issue (US requirement for visa waiver programme). The problem is that they didn't care much about privacy. As an effect the data is poorly protected and what's even worse, accessible by RF. So now, to steal someone's identity, you don't even have to have physical access to his passport. Just get within 20-30cm.
Interesting news, considering that Portugal, an EU member since 1986, has been issuing these EU biometric passports for some years now. Actually, nowadays you may even enter Portugal through a completely automated passport control.
Like how the EU decided to boycott Austria when the "wrong party" (Jurg Haider's) got too many votes for their taste?
And how Belgium criminalised the Vlaams Blok party?
You can have liberties in the EU, just don't ask for the wrong liberties.
The EU was given a choice between biometric passports and having all of their citizens apply for visa when traveling to the US. For some reason they thought it that staying within the Visa waiver programme was more important than putting their citizen's fingerprints on rfid chips in their passports.
Given the importance of the US in international commerce, science, technology etc. this doesn't seem such a stupid decision.
Like how the EU decided to boycott Austria when the "wrong party" (Jurg Haider's) got too many votes for their taste?
The EU did not boycott Austria, the member states of the EU agreed not to have bi-lateral engagements with Austria. Each member state, as a sovereign nation, is perfectly within its right to object to the choices of another.
The only role that the EU could play was to act as a mediator to ensure that the situation got resolved. And guess what? That's exactly what they did.
And how Belgium criminalised the Vlaams Blok party?
Belgium did not criminalize Vlaams Blok, they broke the law. The same law that everyone else had to adhere to.
But more importantly, what has that go to do with the EU? Next you'll start blaming the EU for Zimbabwe or Iraq.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed