Index: [thread] [date] [subject] [author]
  From: Sverker K. Hogberg <skh2101@columbia.edu>
  To  : <cpc@emoglen.law.columbia.edu>
  Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 16:58:06 -0400

Re: "Real ID Act" About to Become Law

I think you have to consider the manner in which the Real ID Act is 
being passed. It's very suspect to attempt to pass controversial 
legislation as a rider to an appropriations bill. This is doubly true 
for a completely unrelated appropriations bill for emergency military 
spending that is time sensitive and has little political opposition. It 
ensures that the rider legislation gets minimal, if any, scrutiny from 
either a qualified legslative committee or on the floor.

Also, I just don't see how putting more personal information on an ID 
card (including immutable biometrics) in digital form, making it more 
easily and universally machine readable (i.e., allowing easier 
downloading and archiving - possibly by means of RFID), and placing its 
data in more widely accessible databases accomplishes anything good with 
regard to national security. If the card can still be forged or 
misappropriated (I don't see why it couldn't), you've just increased the 
damage ID theft will cause. And if you rely more heavily on centralized 
authentication then you've created an incredibly potent system of 
citizen surveillance. And all of this without proper legislative scrutiny.

Asma Chandani wrote:

>As long as there are things called as nation states with sovereignty
>over their borders, isn't it perfectly reasonable to expect countries to
>issue whatever sort of national ID card they want to, call it what you
>will, and put what you will on it? 
>
>At this stage, it doesn't seem the card is capable of actively emitting
>a signal of its own force, nor across long distances, so there's not
>that same worry about interception. Assuming one day the cards, or a
>chip embedded somewhere else, is capable of emitting signal, wouldn't
>the traffic created by everyone's chips be impossible to navigate
>through, i.e. standing as a barrier to such a system from emerging in
>the first place? 
>
>I have a driver's license in my purse right now, and I'm not too sure
>I'd be upset to know that 30 years from now my daughter's driver's
>license card was more technically advanced than mine. As long as the
>identity verification means used by the sovereign is external (something
>you have, not something you are), then I'm still missing why people are
>so up in arms about this. 
>
>I just hope the new tinfoil guarded wallets are made by designers too.
>;) If not, Caitlin and I may just have found a product for our long-
>contemplated-joint business venture!
>
>~Asma
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-cpc@emoglen.law.columbia.edu
>[mailto:owner-cpc@emoglen.law.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Sverker K.
>Hogberg
>Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 4:04 PM
>To: CPC@emoglen.law.columbia.edu
>Subject: "Real ID Act" About to Become Law
>
>
>Here's an article about the "Real ID Act" (imposing uniform requirements
>
>on state drivers licenses) that has been attached to an emergency 
>military spending bill that is expected to be signed into law very soon.
>
>This seems like a particularly serious (but typical) abuse of 
>legislative riders to appropriations bills.
>http://news.com.com/FAQ+How+Real+ID+will+affect+you/2100-1028_3-5697111.
>html?tag=nefd.lede
>
>"Starting three years from now, if you live or work in the United 
>States, you'll need a federally approved ID card to travel on an 
>airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, or take
>
>advantage of nearly any government service."
>
>State licenses will have to store your name, birth date, sex, ID number,
>
>digital photograph, and address, and perhaps biometric data like retinal
>
>scans (TBD by homeland security dept). Since state licenses will have to
>
>use "common machine-readable technology" (barcodes, etc) this 
>potentially allows for far better tracking/surveillance of individuals, 
>and far better economies of scale for deploying scanning and centralized
>
>authentication systems, even outside of the context of government
>services.
>
>Imagine having your license scanned, centrally authenticated, and logged
>
>for each and every one of the times you currently present photo ID (at 
>bars, when buying cigarettes, at security checkpoints in large manhattan
>
>office buildings, at pharmacies, etc). That's a huge step in the 
>direction of a ubiquitous national ID card system w/o the 
>public/legislative scrutiny and vetting usually given to a stand-alone
>bill.
>
>
>Slashdot Coverage: 
>http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/05/05/06/1516210.shtml?tid=158&tid=172&tid=2
>19
>Real ID Act (see Title II): 
>http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:2:./temp/~c1098DBdTR::
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list
>  
>

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list



Index: [thread] [date] [subject] [author]