UK Identity Cards

In my traditional contrarian style . . .

What are the issues regarding identity cards. I think there are two main ones that the 'pro' lobby would state:

(i) Stops identity fraud
We work in the IT industry. We know it's forgable, we know whatever security arrangements they put in place it will be cracked. Not through some super-human mathematical combinatorical effort, but because the system is put in place by fallable human beings. If you accept that, then you must agree that Identity cards are dangerous; once it's cracked it will be accepted across the world as a valid indicator of identity - identity fraud at it's best, because no-one will question it.

(ii) Helps prevent terrorism
Does it? Germany have identity cards and it still has not helped the authorities bring all of those people involved in the terrorist cell that flew planes into the World Trade Centre to justice; and it certainly didn't help prevent the atrocity. Spain have identity cards - terrorists still blew up Madrid, and the arrests again have been rather shortcoming for such an international effort. As an aside - the UK appears to have been one of the most successful nations at rooting out terrrorists and preventing them from executing their plans and we do not currently have identity cards.

So I ask: what is right with identity cards? What problem do they solve?

(I've set aside the issue that govt expect us to pay for them, make them compulsory - with no means test, too! So the poorest will be paying around two weeks benefit money in order to comply with the law)

There are NO advantages to this system. It will simply allow the government the opportunity to control our lives that much more. As for security, an system can be cracked, anbd doubtless the system will be. To keep the ID cards up to date will cost us a fortune as they would need replacing on a regular basis

Rule number one of IT - Never have a single point of failure. The fact that they are going to keep the country's details on a single database is what scares me the most. If someone hacked in they could create false identities based on anyone/everyone in the UK

Ok on the radio just now they were talking about ID cards, they said they will now cost about £90. Why do we have to pay that? What if you cant afford it? Will you be thrown into debters prision :rolleyes: :eek2:

Next thing we'll have a mark that we won't be able to trade without on our forehead, or hand . . .

Having one unified method of identification will only make it easier for criminals to steal identities. I think, what is needed, is for the measures already in place to be tightened.

The more forms of ID are required, the harder it is to build up someone elses ID. You've only got to look at the trouble M$ .NET passport has caused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

Having one unified method of identification will only make it easier for criminals to steal identities. I think, what is needed, is for the measures already in place to be tightened.

The more forms of ID are required, the harder it is to build up someone elses ID. You've only got to look at the trouble M$ .NET passport has caused.

---

I agree entirely

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

Having one unified method of identification will only make it easier for criminals to steal identities. I think, what is needed, is for the measures already in place to be tightened.

The more forms of ID are required, the harder it is to build up someone elses ID. You've only got to look at the trouble M$ .NET passport has caused.

---

A tesco clubcard contains more information about you then these ID cards will. There will be idenity theft no matter what, there is little anyone can do about this. Tighening up the ID we have at the moment is of course a good idea, but maybe we should be teaching people how to protect themselves against having the idenity stolen.

A Tesco's Clubcard may hold information such as your name and address, and buying habits, but it won't contain:

(i) National Insurance no
(ii) Medical Information: including family histories
(iii) Bioinformatics
(iv) Criminal Record

Do you want this information stored all in the same place?

I dont mind because I have no criminal record, I must drop loads of hair so the biometrics really isnt anything to be to worried about, and medical records well they have to be given when you are applying for health insurance so whats the fuse. With that information they legaly can't descriminate against you because you or your great grand uncle twice removed had SVT?

I have no criminal record - now nor has this guy: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/m...er/4579853.stm

Do you want you're card to show incorrect data about you? As a test look at your credit record, and look at the mistakes they make.

. . .and besides you are not making an argument about what is right about ID cards.

just out of curiosity. What sort of Identification policy do you have now? and how is this different?

But even if he hadn't been cleared when he went for a job he would have had to tell them that he has a criminal record if they ask, other wise he is in breach of contract.

Yer that guy's unlucky. Read that earlier, just makes you think how many people are reall innocent, and are only in there so that the public have the perception that the police are doing their job?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

. . .and besides you are not making an argument about what is right about ID cards.

---

Well if they stored all your information, where a library card, ATM, and door key, you would be really screwed if you lost it.

Anyway, I don't see an advantage to having them but I don't see why people are getting in a big stress about it all. When they come in its not like you have to carry them everywhere, like in wartime. So who will see all this information about you? The goverment?

Even your bank and your insurance company knows more of your personal details than you are aware of. They know where you live, your wife and kid's name, your birthday, your age, your account details, your pincode, your latest shopping details, your purchase habits, your stock portfolio, your wage details, who you work for etc...

So what's different?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

. . .and besides you are not making an argument about what is right about ID cards.

---

Hmmmm

Face recognition works in 65% of cases
Fingerprint scan works in 70% of cases
Iris scan works in 95% of cases

However, note that Fingerprint scans can be fooled with plastic overlays on your finger, and Iris scans cannot differentiate between an eye and a picture of an eye!!

This technology just is not reliable enough to warrant this kind of security. In response to John Tindell's reply that you don't have a criminal record. If face recognition only works 65% of the time it could easily mistake you for a known paedophile, or worse mistake a murderer for you thus giving you a false criminal record. And if fingerprint and iris scans can be fooled so easily, someone could easily assume your identity to commit a crime.

There is still no argument about what is right about identity cards. If I were just about to spend £billions I would want to know why and what I am spending the money on. It goes without saying this will be paid for out of the electorates pocket.

The real penalty of ID cards is that those who do not know the truth behind the technology will take the ID card as absolute proof of identity. This is very dangerous. The truth being (bad turn of phrase, sorry) that technology is inherently only as reliable as the people who created it. I'm assuming this will be same crowd that have just thrown away £950 million NHS system due to inherent design flaws that were not recognised early on.

I mean how hard can it be:

the NHS has hospitals
the NHS has patients
the NHS has doctors
the NHS has nurses
the NHS has treatments
the NHS has drugs

Anyone of us could create a relational database design from this simple facts. How can you waste SO much money!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

There is still no argument about what is right about identity cards. If I were just about to spend £billions I would want to know why and what I am spending the money on. It goes without saying this will be paid for out of the electorates pocket.

The real penalty of ID cards is that those who do not know the truth behind the technology will take the ID card as absolute proof of identity. This is very dangerous. The truth being (bad turn of phrase, sorry) that technology is inherently only as reliable as the people who created it. I'm assuming this will be same crowd that have just thrown away £950 million NHS system due to inherent design flaws that were not recognised early on.

---

Indeed, and at £93 each it seems way too expensive.
They obviously have alterior motives as to what they intend to use ID cards for

Have you guys heard about those subdermal chips? I mean, those things that they are coming out with to stick inside your skin that holds all your information?

Yeah, they've been around for a while. Check it out here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wally Pipp

Even your bank and your insurance company knows more of your personal details than you are aware of. They know where you live, your wife and kid's name, your birthday, your age, your account details, your pincode, your latest shopping details, your purchase habits, your stock portfolio, your wage details, who you work for etc...

So what's different?

---

I trust my government even less than I trust my bank.

And now they want satellite tracking of al vehicles...

ID cards are not what concern me. What concerns me is how easy it is to fool these biometrics. :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

Face recognition works in 65% of cases
Fingerprint scan works in 70% of cases
Iris scan works in 95% of cases

However, note that Fingerprint scans can be fooled with plastic overlays on your finger, and Iris scans cannot differentiate between an eye and a picture of an eye!!

This technology just is not reliable enough to warrant this kind of security. In response to John Tindell's reply that you don't have a criminal record. If face recognition only works 65% of the time it could easily mistake you for a known paedophile, or worse mistake a murderer for you thus giving you a false criminal record. And if fingerprint and iris scans can be fooled so easily, someone could easily assume your identity to commit a crime.

---

Not to mention we are talking about protection from criminals with biometric tech. What makes biometric proponents think a CRIMINAL wont cut off someones finger or remove their eyeball to get past these scans even if they were 100% reliable

How many people get killed for their credit, or debit cards? I'm sure that it happens - but not very often. The vast majority of criminals are still not prepared to take a human life in order to profit.

I see no reason why that is about to change when biometrics are introduced.

True, but then with such a fallable system they wouldn't need to

Indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

How many people get killed for their credit, or debit cards? I'm sure that it happens - but not very often. The vast majority of criminals are still not prepared to take a human life in order to profit.

I see no reason why that is about to change when biometrics are introduced.

---

How many people have been killed because they wouldn't give up their mobile phone. I know they werent "intentionaly" killed but the same worry still applies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john tindell

How many people have been killed because they wouldn't give up their mobile phone. I know they werent "intentionaly" killed but the same worry still applies.

---

I don't know. I doubt that it's common-place. It's scare-mongering. Nothing more, nothing less. A well informed individual should be able to discern the difference.

It's called the New World Order.

Can't wait till Iran. :wave:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4623539.stm

and the plot thickens . . .

£300!?!
How much exactly do they think we are on per year? 500k!?!?!?!

Don't forget the hidden costs.
Anyone who uses the service to confirm peoples Ids, like banks, will be charged by the Govt. That person once Id will then no doubt have the charge passed on the them.

This won't pass parliament. The public would revolt over it, or at the very least there would certainly by protests on a veeeeeeery large scale

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

This won't pass parliament. The public would revolt over it, or at the very least there would certainly by protests on a veeeeeeery large scale

---

Really, I don't see any mass protests yet. The Minister responsible has stated that people using the service will be charged. I've added the bit about the cost being passed on to the customer. Call me cynical but when have you ever seen a business absorb costs instead of passing them on?

I can't believe it has passed through parliament! I am infuriated over these stupid cards!

ah, underwear contortion, seems a national sport with you lot :)

:lol:
Just annoys me that these politicians think they know what's best for us without actually asking us first

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

:lol:
Just annoys me that these politicians think they know what's best for us without actually asking us first

---

Those who know what's best for us must rise up and save us from ourselves.