UK Identity Cards

GweiLo · Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 149

But that argument works both for and against compulsory ID Cards Peter.

If we have to have an ID card that is believed to be foolproof then it will be regarded as definitive proof of ones identity (and most likely defintive proof of a number of others things if this particular card ends up being used in the way envisaged by the government).

But of course it won't be foolproof, it will simply be difficult to replicate. Just as every other card or document that has ever been produced with the aim of making it difficult to replicate it will only be a question of time before they do get replicated. So we will then have a card that is generally thought to be definitive proof, that can be replicated, making it easier to convince people you are someone you are not.

Aside from that the difficulty of replicating the card doesn't change the fact that the information will not be secure, because such information never is. Not only the government/civil servants will have access to the information, but the plan is for commercial organisations to have access too.

We are told that the information we provide on census forms is confidential and that we will not be personally identified in any data. Literally, that is true. However, it is common practice for marketers to use census data and other provided by the government and by comparing it to commercial data held on us, to make the matches so that those marketers can tie the cencus data to individual households. Hence information that we already provide and expect to be kept secure is actually divulged.

I would still want to know two things before I would consider supporting this.
1) That the card will be confined to identity, whereas the plan os for it to become much more than that.
2) A comprehensive freedom of information Act. We should have access to all and any data held on us by anyone and if such data needs to be kept secret from us then only the courts should grant such secrecy on a case by case basis. At present it is the government who decide what we can and cannot see.

Guest · Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 7:11 pm Post subject:

Firstly, if the argument works both for and against then how can it only be used as 'evidence' against ID cards - I was responding to the initial post and that's exactly the point I was making.

Second, the example quoted referred to someone pretending to be the person they were impersonating, the implication being, as there was a 'very large legal trial' that they had limitied success. This simply would not be the case with the proposed UK ID card, unless of course that individual was able to produce their own ID card containing their own biometric data, and update the central database with the same data, while at the same time remove all traces of the previous data - not too easy I would have thought!

Surely nobody believes any system will be foolproof, I've worked in IT developing computer systems too long to think that. But it doesn't have to be perfect it just has to be better than what we have now.

Our current system which is based on signatures and (latterly) photos is well trusted by most but it is now just too easy for some people to abuse it, surely nobody would argue that what we have now is adequate.

My understanding is that it is proposed for commercial organisations to have access 'for verification of identity'.

Guest · Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 8:45 pm Post subject:

GweiLo · Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 149

Newsfeeds

Latest Posts

	Dimsum Forum Index -> Viewpoints	All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2