Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New York Issues RFID-Encoded Drivers Licenses

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the tinfoil-hats-are-extra dept.

Privacy 288

JagsLive passes along the intelligence that New York has become the second state to issue drivers licenses with RFID tags (Washington was the first). The new "enhanced drivers licenses" cost $30 more than the old ones. They can be used instead of a passport for entry into the US by land or sea (not air) from Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. Authorities say no personal information will be stored or transmitted by the chip, only an ID number that will be meaningless to anyone but DHS. Citizens of New York who prefer not to carry an identifying RFID chip can still get an old-style license.

cancel ×

288 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

optional for how long? (5, Interesting)

ruggerboy (553525) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043505)

Reminds me of how several years ago blackberries used to be "optional" for associates at my law firm, and there was even a waitlist. That is until partners realized just how effective they were at keeping tabs on exactly where we were and what we were doing at all hours. Now they come standard issue with your welcome packet. Expect the same for new drivers pretty soon.

You'd be Wrong (4, Interesting)

mpapet (761907) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043693)

1. All the talk about "tracking" is nonsense. An RFID anything has a range measured in inches normally. Stuff it in your wallet sandwiched in between more cards and it pretty much won't work.

2. $30 is about right after all is said and done. No one is getting rich making these cards. There's secure printing, personalization, etc.

3. What's the application though? If it is just border crossings, then do border crossings have the infrastructure to process a contactless card?

4. Accidentally leaving the card inside a microwave oven while you are warming coffee would harm the chip, so don't ever do that.

Re:You'd be Wrong (1)

eli867 (300724) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043809)

1. You're mostly right, though there have been several demostrations of people able to read RFID tags at a significantly greater distance with the right hardware. Google it.

3. Well, obviously the border crossings have a scanner, otherwise what would the point be?

4. That's irrelelvant so long as the RFID is optional. And presumably by the time it is not optional, you'll actually *need* that tag in order to do things.

Re:You'd be Wrong (1, Flamebait)

calmofthestorm (1344385) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044023)

Naah we'll just need to have a chip implanted in our right hand or forehead in order to buy or sell anything.

Anyone else getting some serious stupidity vibes from the fundies running this country?

*nerd rage*

Re:You'd be Wrong (2, Informative)

mpapet (761907) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044027)

there have been several demostrations of people able to read RFID tags at a significantly greater distance with the right hardware.

And what exactly will they discover? Some long string of bytes that's all. What do the bytes mean? You watch too many movies where these bytes lead to some impossible story progression.

Well, obviously the border crossings have a scanner, otherwise what would the point be?

Are there scanners now? Are they compatible? That's a non-obvious question, but very relevant in the contactless world.

That's irrelelvant so long as the RFID is optional. And presumably by the time it is not optional, you'll actually *need* that tag in order to do things.

You make my point for me very nicely thank you. What are these magical uses besides border crossings? Do you understand that presenting the card without rfid functionality will be required at least in my lifetime? Does the State have access to the format of the bytes stored on the card? Again, you watch too many movies.

Re:You'd be Wrong (4, Insightful)

Cajun Hell (725246) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044449)

And what exactly will they discover? Some long string of bytes that's all.

A unique string of bytes. It's different for every person, but it's the same every time you read the same person, so you just need to tie it to identifying info once. Walk past a reader, buy something with debit card, and upload the tuple to a server. Now when you walk by a different reader, doubleclick knows who you are.

It's a cookie.

You watch too many movies where these bytes lead to some impossible story progression.

That would be Minority Report.

Re:You'd be Wrong (3, Informative)

Frigga's Ring (1044024) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043933)

An RFID anything has a range measured in inches normally.

I don't think you need to look further than Defcon to see the fun things you can do with RFID tags. In fact, if I recall correctly, at Defcon 13, they read an RFID token from at least 69 feet away.

Re:You'd be Wrong (1)

Dgawld (1251898) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044399)

4. Accidentally leaving the card inside a microwave oven while you are warming coffee would harm the chip, so don't ever do that.

I usually warm my license with my coffee. It's more malleable after.

Re:You'd be Wrong (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25044429)

An RFID chip Normally has a ranged of Inches
that is limited by the stock reader that is designed to normally work with it
Enter High gain receivers antennas , digital signal processing and a function called integration
with that, the data stream is No longer limited to inches.
With such a setup in minutes , It can read RFID chips very far away even miles away
We must think beyond normal and think about what the military, governments and bad ass terrorists can do.
An RFID reader is a radio transponder is normally very insensitive. However, with a good antenna and a well designed receiver and integrator it can be received very far away.

Re:You'd be Wrong (5, Insightful)

tomz16 (992375) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044511)

And why does it have to be contactless for ANY of the proposed applications?

Am I the only one who fails to see the push for RFID in identifying cards? I've use my mastercard with RFID chip at the local supermarket. It's really NO more convenient than the magstripe... but it DOES open up the possibility that someone could clone my card from a few feet away!!! Furthermore, I don't see how this benefits the CC company. I've never had a magstripe on a credit card wear out before the bank sent me a new one (and I use my credit card at least once or twice a day)...

If you really are JUST storing an identifier on the drivers license, wouldn't a barcode or magstripe accomplish the same thing, AND be MUCH more secure? My current NYS drivers license has one of those fancy 2D looking barcodes. Isn't that sufficient for storing an ID number? If it isn't, then what about just printing another one of those. There's plenty of space! Not only would that be cheaper (hardware is currently in place), but it would also be impossible to probe from dozens of feet away!

Re:optional for how long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25043837)

At the university where i work (in canada) all student and staff ID cards come standard with RFID chips to enable access to locked areas and after hours access to buildings for which we are on the access list.

Re:optional for how long? (3, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044189)

In Soviet Russia, RFID chips come standard with YOU!!!!

are they paying 24/7 at mini wage of better for th (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043905)

are they paying you 24/7 at mini wage of better for that?

Re:optional for how long? (1)

TheModelEskimo (968202) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044317)

I agree - these upgrades are frustrating. At my law firm, it used to be that you could get away with a post-1985 Lear and a couple of 40" screens, with a personal assistant of any gender. Nowadays it seems like you have to have the latest and greatest of everything - my Lear has been traded up to some fancy european jet copter with bulletproof windows and a bathtub; my 40" screens were donated to the bank down the street in favor of specially-constructed contact lenses, and my personal assistant is an asian female, about 5'10". Why that is all so important is beyond me.

remove the chip? (3, Interesting)

jgarra23 (1109651) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043507)

What are the legalities of defacing the ID by removing the chip?

Re:remove the chip? (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043537)

You can still get a liscense without the chip, so I don't really see the point. Unless you just want to waste $30 to get an RFID chip that contains nothing but an ID number.

Re:remove the chip? (1)

jgarra23 (1109651) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043621)

The article (while it does mention the current licenses) doesn't mention whether or not these new IDs will be replacing them or not, or if they give you an option to purchase one or the other hence my wondering about removing the chip.

Re:remove the chip? (1)

JamesTheBoilermaker (822315) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044363)

Washington has an "Enhanced Driver's License" as well for border crossings, but I haven't heard anything that would suggest that those would be come the only driver's license available.

Re:remove the chip? (3, Funny)

ypctx (1324269) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043893)

You get to pick from lifelong vacation on Guantanamo and having the chip implanted (early adopter, you then have to tell people you did that volutarily). They also take all your amero money and prevent you from leaving the North American Union. I assume since you dare to ask such questions on internet, you already are on the no-fly list, so they just add you to the no-boat and no-train lists. On the contrary, if you choose the implant, you get a free foreclosed home (left by someone who had chosen the Guantanamo) and bunch of empty credit cards, so you can start a new life without such mistakes. Happy days!

Re:remove the chip? (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043999)

everyone laughs at you for losing 30 bucks.

Re:remove the chip? (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044401)

What are the legalities of defacing the ID by removing the chip?

Troll? I skimmed the article and didn't see an answer there.
Seems like a valid question to me...

Not by air? (3, Insightful)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043511)

What a waste then.

Why not just get a regular drivers license and a passport as two different pieces of identity.

Re:Not by air? (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043639)

Why not just get a regular drivers license and a passport as two different pieces of identity.

It's a lot easier to forget or lose a passport than a license plate.

Re:Not by air? (2, Informative)

FireStormZ (1315639) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043689)

ummm drivers license, not license plate... and a license is easier to lose.

Re:Not by air? (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044001)

Crap... Reading comprehension failure on TF title. Please mod my post into oblivion...

Still, my license is on me all the time. My passport lives in a locked filing cabinet and only sees light when I go overseas. I may actually opt for this if I were frequently traveling to/from Canada/Mexico.

Re:Not by air? (1)

FireStormZ (1315639) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044121)

meh, we all have abrain fart from time to time... but you make a good point, all those flks in upstate NY might like to be able to go across the border a bit easier, still I would not consolidate my ID in this fasion on principle alone! I dont think states should be issueing ID to suit federal standards..

Re:Not by air? (3, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043643)

I don't know... I'm tempted to question why a driver's license is used as ID in the first place. It's a license to drive a car, but people treat it like it's a universal ID and everyone is supposed to have one.

Why not your license to own a pet? Or... I don't know, your license to be a lifeguard? Your license to carry a gun?

Like why should having a license to drive be taken as proof of identity and authorization to leave/enter the country?

Re:Not by air? (4, Informative)

swimin (828756) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043687)

Because its a convenient and commonplace ID, that is usually issued by every state in a form that also allows nondrivers to get one too.

Re:Not by air? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044047)

Well, yeah, I know that's *why*. My post is somewhat rhetorical, and I say, "I'm tempted to question..." My point is that we do it out of tradition and convenience, but not because it's any kind of a well thought out system.

Re:Not by air? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044199)

In places like New York where lots of people don't even know how to drive, you can get a "state ID" that everyone will take instead of a driver's license. I know it was the same in Pennsylvania and IIRC New Jersey. I've even gotten into a bar with my passport before. Most places specify a "government-issued ID", and not a driver's license specifically.

Re:Not by air? (2, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044281)

My point is that we do it out of tradition and convenience, but not because it's any kind of a well thought out system.

That, and the fact that every time some sort of national ID card comes up people start screaming about infringing on rights, etc.

Re:Not by air? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043733)

I don't know... I'm tempted to question why a driver's license is used as ID in the first place. It's a license to drive a car, but people treat it like it's a universal ID and everyone is supposed to have one.

Because it's the most common government-issued photo ID. The several states also issue similar-looking IDs that do not include a license to drive.

Re:Not by air? (2, Informative)

profplump (309017) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043901)

Unfortunately most states only allow you to get one or the other -- if you are licensed to drive you may not obtain a non-drivers ID.

Re:Not by air? (4, Funny)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043939)

I don't know... I'm tempted to question why a driver's license is used as ID in the first place. It's a license to drive a car, but people treat it like it's a universal ID and everyone is supposed to have one.

Cause it's America. How did you get wherever you are to show your ID if not by car? But you do have a good point, and next time I buy beer I'm gonna pull out the dog license. Then again, the gun license might get free beer and an opportunity to witness my tax dollars at work.

Re:Not by air? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25044307)

funny, stupid, but funny

Are you stupid? (2, Informative)

raehl (609729) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044251)

A driver's license is used because it meets the requirement for government-issued photo-identification. You can also use a state-issued ID card any time you would use a driver's license EXCEPT for driving. It just so happens that most adults want to be licensed to drive, so if they need a driver's license anyway, there's not much point in ALSO having a state ID card.**

You can NOT use your pet owner's license card or your hunting license card (depending on the state and purpose, your hunting license might be acceptable) because they generally do not require as rigorous a verification of identity as a state ID or driver's license.

** Although I used to have a state ID card AND a state driver's license when I was younger and lived in IL so that I could still get in the bar when they cops took my license as bond for the speeding tickets. (Fortunately I've lost my youthful good looks*** and my lead foot and neither is an issue anymore.)

*** Ok, fine, the looks were never good, but they were at least youthful.

Re:Not by air? (1)

Cajun Hell (725246) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044497)

Well, they wanted to use fishing licenses, but those are mandatory and not everyone likes to fish.

Re:Not by air? (1)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043647)

I have an uncle who lives near Buffalo, and his business takes him into Canada at least two or three times a week. Now that a passport is required for that, this should be a nice asset and time saver for him. Actually, I should probably shoot him an email...

I could also see this being a nice convienence for people going on Carribean cruises that leave from Miami, or Baja cruises leaving from LA. Especially once other states start picking this up.

Re:Not by air? (1)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043919)

Like I said. Some businesses are dicks about wanting 2 pieces of identity. Drivers license + Passport is more handy because of that. And if you lost 1, the other would usually be sufficient in getting the other.

Aside from that, I could care less about the "evul tracking". When you go to another country, you're going to be tracked cause they want you to leave when your time is up. And if you have a drivers license in the USA, they can track you by license #. Oh noes! My securities be all gones! (yeah, wouldnt that be the comment for the lehman corp).

quite useful for upstaters Re:Not by air? (2, Interesting)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043751)

I live in Upstate New York and cross by land into Canada at least 2-3 times annually. I would much prefer to not have to worry about my passport for those crossings, and this fits that need for me. Regular license + $30 is still quite a bit less than what I paid for my passport (or what I would pay for a replacement if I were to loose it).

Residents, not citizens (1)

crow (16139) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043513)

Minor nitpick: States are not sovereign entities, so people who reside in them are residents, not citizens.

Re:Residents, not citizens (1)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043567)

I believe that you are incorrect.

Re:Residents, not citizens (4, Funny)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043599)

Actually they are; they yield only a portion of their sovereignty to the Federal government to keep the British at bay.

"Portion" my behind (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043825)

[The several states] yield only a portion of their sovereignty to the Federal government to keep the British at bay.

"Portion" went out the window with the Supreme Court's expansion of the scope of "commerce among the several states" in Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Residents, not citizens (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043719)

First, depending on how you want to define "citizen", it's not clear to me that states would have to be sovereign. Second, states are constitutionally semi-sovereign. The federal government can compel states in some ways, but the authority of the federal government over state matters is limited.

Of course, it's become much less limited as time has gone on, but technically they still have more sovereignty than they tend to exercise.

Re:Residents, not citizens (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043953)

Score: -1 Pedantic

Re:Residents, not citizens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25043977)

I think you need to look up the meeting of the word "state."

Re:Residents, not citizens (3, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044129)

I think you need to look up the meeting of the word "state."

I think you need to look up the meaning of the word "meeting". And possibly the meaning of the word "meaning." And possibly understand the difference in pronunciation between the letters 't' and 'n'.

Meaningless? (4, Insightful)

einer (459199) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043515)

Meaningless to anyone but DHS until some nitwit with an unencrypted drive on their laptop leaves it in an airport lounge.

This is just monumentally stupid. Seriously. A monument is required to commemorate this epically stupid idea. I'm thinking a huge statue of a DHS lacky shrugging their shoulders. Preferably with an Alfred E. Neumann "What Me Worried?" look on their mug.

Re:Meaningless? (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043701)

Meaningless to anyone but DHS until some nitwit with an unencrypted drive on their laptop leaves it in an airport lounge.

So you information is on one more hard drive for somebody to lose. There are already plenty - It doesn't seem like this makes the likelihood of your information being mishandled much greater.

Re:Meaningless? (1)

profplump (309017) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043947)

Because then when the DHS lost their data it would not only include your name and address, but also a meaningless RFID serial number? I don't understand how this increases the threat of DHS stupidity.

Re:Meaningless? (2, Interesting)

megamerican (1073936) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044423)

Because then when the DHS lost their data it would not only include your name and address, but also a meaningless RFID serial number? I don't understand how this increases the threat of DHS stupidity.

Thanks to Bill Clinton and a Republican congress all SS#'s are in our drivers lisences.

Check out the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reform Act (known as welfare reform) passed in 1996.

The illegal immigration law prohibits the use of state driver's licenses after Oct. 1, 2000 unless they contain Social Security numbers as the unique numeric identifier "that can be read visually or by electronic means." (Section 656(b)) The act requires all driver's licenses to conform to regulations promulgated by the Department of Transportation, which published its proposed regulations on June 17. (Federal Register, vol. 63, no. 116, pp. 33219-33225)

Re:Meaningless? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044507)

Never underestimate the threat of DHS stupidity. By having people remove their shoes while going through airport scanners, they are already contributing to the uninhibited spread of foot fungus spores.

Re:Meaningless? (1)

diodeus (96408) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044583)

Time to get tin-foil hats for our wallets.

Like hell (1)

Smidge204 (605297) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043527)

Thanks but no thanks. A simple ID number is enough to be tracked or have my identity stolen, and having one that can be read remotely is not an option. Knowing the DHS is involved it won't actually work and will be a joke on security issues, too.

If I ever get a new ID card I think I'll toss it in the microwave the day I get it.
=Smidge=

You are already being tracked (4, Interesting)

mpapet (761907) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043873)

Worrying about the tracking boogeyman is ridiculous.

I'm not sure why you labor under the illusion that your activities aren't tracked now. Most of your activity is in one way or another and then packaged and sold to any willing buyer including Government entities.

Credit Score? Tracking
Medical Records? This is a murky area, but I'm sure the U.S. health insurance co's would love to trade patient health scores. No. HIPPAA didn't outlaw this.
Communication? Done. FISA, Telcos, NSA, Etc.
Debit transations? Tracking.
Other finance tracking? Done. It's called taxes.

There's lots of worthy things to contribute your personal energy to. This isn't one of them.

Re:Like hell (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044071)

The RFID chip in my new bank card, which I'm not happy about, can only be read by the scanner if I hold it very close (about an inch or less). So how far away could a really powerful scanner be to still pick up the RFID information? Wouldn't it still have to be pretty close?

Re:Like hell (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044531)

It's all in the sensitivity of the receiver. RFIDs can be read at distances of hundreds of yards with a good receiver.

Re:Like hell (1)

Smidge207 (1278042) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044097)

If I ever get a new ID card I think I'll toss it in the microwave the day I get it

Oh my evil doppelganger strikes 'gain. Ummm...stupid much? You give out your DL number & social at least once a week. How is this different? Oh yes. That's right. Anonymous will read it from a distance. Uh huh.

=Smidge=

Meaningless? (5, Insightful)

McGregorMortis (536146) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043543)

A Social Security number is "meaningless". It's just an identifier. But it's a number that uniquely identifies you, and if other people get their hands on it, or are able to spoof it, then than meaningless number can have adverse effects on your life.

How is this "meaningless" identifier any different?

Re:Meaningless? (1)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043753)

Of course. Like most UIDs it is meaningless.

On its own.

I want to know what is in the database and associated with that meaningless number.

Re:Meaningless? (1)

profplump (309017) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043969)

Because you can't use the DHS RFID serial number to get credit issued, which is the only (valid) reason people worry about their social security number.

You shouldn't be able to get credit issued with just an SSN either, but that's another store entirely.

Re:Meaningless? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044163)

Because you can't use the DHS RFID serial number to get credit issued yet

There. Fixed that for you.

Re:Meaningless? (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044181)

Because you can't use the DHS RFID serial number to get credit issued, which is the only (valid) reason people worry about their social security number.

Or access to your 401K

Or access to your bank accounts

Re:Meaningless? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25044245)

Because you can't use the DHS RFID serial number to get credit issued,

...yet. Who's going to stop private companies from linking personal information to your RFID serial number??

Relax good citizen (0, Offtopic)

Entropy98 (1340659) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043545)

Citizens of New York who prefer not to carry an identifying RFID chip can still get an old-style license.
 
See, calm down, nothing to see here. Move along.
 
/sarcasm
 
--
  finding my ip address [ipfinding.com]

Since it's a unique UID (1)

koan (80826) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043547)

Then others can read it and track/follow what you do so not entirely "meaningless".

A constant ID# is NOT meaningless... (4, Insightful)

nweaver (113078) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043555)

All someone needs to do is correlate your ID# with you (easy enough to do on many occasions). Once you have that, its no longer a meaningless ID number, but a unique personal tracking number.

Re:A constant ID# is NOT meaningless... (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043861)

All someone needs to do is correlate your ID# with you

Like, say, the many clubs that already scan your license (barcode and/or magstripe) and add you to their database. One more type of scan, and your "meaningless" ID becomes as good as a filled-out-then-thrown-away credit card application to an identity thief.

I used to wonder about the IP address thing (1)

slew (2918) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044475)

Until I heard about this company [ip2location.com]

Before you click, be forwarned they have a live demo on their homepage which estimates your longitude and latitude based on your IP address...

Just wait until they get one of these databases going for RFID tags...

Re:A constant ID# is NOT meaningless... (1)

profplump (309017) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044015)

Which makes it different from your current driver's license number how?

Re:A constant ID# is NOT meaningless... (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044135)

That a drivers license number cannot be read off the card in your wallet from a few feet away.

Re:A constant ID# is NOT meaningless... (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044243)

Can this one be read that way? Does it respond to a general signal or a specific signal? And, it is easily defeated with a strip of aluminum foil.

Baby Steps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25043591)

Brings to mind the Anaconda Plan.

Microwave it? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25043605)

What's the consequence of getting the RFID one and just microwaving it?

Re:Microwave it? (1)

Kindgott (165758) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043925)

I'd say it's a waste of money, since it's an opt-in license and costs you more money to obtain than a regular driver's license.

Re:Microwave it? (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044053)

The consequence is that one has just destroyed the value added that caused one to shell out an extra $30.00.

May as well get the standard license and then flush $30.00 down the toilet.

Sure, you can refuse, but..... (4, Insightful)

Stanislav_J (947290) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043611)

Citizens of New York who prefer not to carry an identifying RFID chip can still get an old-style license.

And those who refuse will go right on the master list under "troublemaker/refusnik/something to hide/potential terrorist."

Hold on.. (5, Interesting)

aero2600-5 (797736) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043631)

"Citizens of New York who prefer not to carry an identifying RFID chip can still get an old-style license."

Wait a second here.. the RFID licenses are $30 more expensive than regular licenses, yet the residents have the option to get the cheaper RFID-free license? Who's going to choose to willingly pay more to be tracked more effectively?

Let me guess. The state isn't telling them that they can choose to get the cheaper older style of license? Brilliant!

Aero

Re:Hold on.. (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043727)

Who's going to choose to willingly pay more to be tracked more effectively?

New Yorkers who cross into Canada, Mexico, or the Caribbean by land or sea often and, like me, don't believe the tracking potential is an issue.

I believe this "They can track my movements" thing is way overblown.

Re:Hold on.. (5, Funny)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043739)

Does the tinfoil go shiny side in or shiny side out? You sound like an expert and I can never remember...

Re:Hold on.. (4, Insightful)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043767)

"Citizens of New York who prefer not to carry an identifying RFID chip can still get an old-style license."

Wait a second here.. the RFID licenses are $30 more expensive than regular licenses, yet the residents have the option to get the cheaper RFID-free license? Who's going to choose to willingly pay more to be tracked more effectively? Aero

I don't know, maybe people who travel to and from Canada on a frequent basis who don't want to have to remember their passport?

Re:Hold on.. (1)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043795)

I will.

It's either this or go through the trouble of getting a $100 passport and renewing it every few years... and risk forgetting it when I go on a trip.

If all I need is my license, and it's 1/3 the price of the passport, I'm all over it.

who will? plenty Re:Hold on.. (2, Informative)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043833)

the residents have the option to get the cheaper RFID-free license? Who's going to choose to willingly pay more

Many people forget how many cities in Upstate New York are close to the border. I cross the border on average 2-3 times per year by car myself. Currently I have to carry my passport to get back in - if I could go back to just carrying my driver's license, I would be much happier. Loosing a driver's license is a pretty minor expense in comparison to loosing a passport - and driver's licenses are generally replaced quite quickly here in NY state.

Re:who will? plenty Re:Hold on.. (4, Informative)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044049)

Loosing a driver's license is a pretty minor expense in comparison to loosing a passport - and driver's licenses are generally replaced quite quickly here in NY state.

It's true! Loose passports sink ships. Or something like that. So remember to tighten your passports, folks!

Passport Card (4, Informative)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043675)

I applied for a new passport this Summer, and it sounds like the new New York DL just includes a "Passport Card" [state.gov] in it. They're both for surface entry of the US from North American and Caribbean countries. The additional DL fee is $30, but a new Passport Card is $45, $20 if you already have a passport book. As such, privacy concerns would be exactly the same as with a new Passport or Passport Card.

Re:Passport Card (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25044403)

As such, privacy concerns would be exactly the same as with a new Passport or Passport Card.

Unfortunately, this is Slashdot, after all. A piece of paper anywhere on the planet with your name on it is a "privacy concern". If anyone recognizes your face, it's a "privacy concern". If you remember who YOU are in the morning, it's a "privacy concern".

A bit pointless? (1)

stockholm syndrome (1365959) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043729)

How many people come into the US by sea? I don't think it's really worth an extra $30 for the ability to visit Canada and Mexico without a passport, especially as most people will have passports anyway.

Obviously the conspiracy theorists will be all over this... I don't care much, being a Brit, although we have similar controversy over identity cards here. Personally it doesn't bother me as I'm not a criminal/am never likely to be a criminal/don't plan on doing anything worthy of attention by the government in my life, so it's never going to affect me. I think too many people have read Nineteen Eighty Four and think any attempt to make things a little more organised is an attempt to take away their civil liberties.

Re:A bit pointless? (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044017)

How many people come into the US by sea?

Think older people taking cruises, especially the ones that live part of the year in Florida.

most people will have passports anyway.

Not necessarily. The easy way to deal with needing a passport is to not leave the country. America is a huge place and it is just as easy to vacation in Puerto Rico without a passport as it is to visit Bermuda, Jamaica, or the British Virgin Islands. One may not be able to visit Vancouver,BC, but one can visit Seattle. One can visit a number of Gulf Coast and Southwest states instead of Mexico and get a similar experience.

And, I agree with you on the scope of the controversy.

Re:A bit pointless? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25044277)

Don't you dare walk in a park without a child [dailymail.co.uk] , otherwise you'll be interrogated by park police.

Resume clubbing in Canada (2, Insightful)

kiehlster (844523) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043741)

If your kids are going to college near the Canadian border, and they insist on paying for an "enhanced driver's license", you know they will be taking trips to Canada to go drinking. I can only imagine some money was shipped over from Canada to pay off legislators to approve this. Obviously there is no other reason to go to Canada, and who would fly over to go drinking anyway?

Re:Resume clubbing in Canada (1)

shallot (172865) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044421)

taking trips to Canada to go drinking

Obviously there is no other reason to go to Canada

Now that was just mean. :)

Just an ID? There's a DB somewhere... (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043765)

So if the card has just and ID on it, that means that there is a database somewhere that contains all of your personal info, not a big shocker. But the ID is usable at every land/sea boarder access point in the US. So given nothing more than a series of numbers, a boarder patrol employee at one of those locations could pull up data on anyone at any time, with out a warrant.

Call me paranoid, but I'm not a big fan of the government having better records of my life than I do. I'm even less of a fan of that information being widely available through out the government. And last but definitely not least, I and not a fan of trusting that information in the hands of each and every single government employee.

So my question is, does this actually make me any more safe? Or is it just another example of wasteful spending, erosion of civil liberties, and a theater of defense?

-Rick

Re:Just an ID? There's a DB somewhere... (4, Insightful)

Reziac (43301) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043965)

And since when did Canada become the enemy?? it irks me no end that I, a birth-citizen of the United States, now need a passport (or equivalent, such as this ID) to go to and from a country that when I was a kid, you just walked or drove or flew across the border and the crossing guard (if any) would smile and wave and say have a nice day. Explain to me how ME and YOU waving around a trackable ID makes the U.S. any "safer"??

As to how it makes the U.S. boundaries more like the Iron Curtain, that needs no explaining. Komrade! Your papers please!!

Re:Just an ID? There's a DB somewhere... (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044287)

And since when did Canada become the enemy??

Direct flights to Cuba... Nuf said.

Fake IDs just became easier (3, Insightful)

Manip (656104) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043807)

Considering how easy RFIDs are to fake and how much they want to automate authentication the technology will be easier to bypass than the old fashioned 3D hologram was.

People assume that just because its new then no bad guy will be able to figure it out... And that worked on Police Radios for like ten years before all the bad guys had scanners.

Security though obscurity at its worst. My 2c.

Re:Fake IDs just became easier (1)

bws111 (1216812) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044565)

What's to figure out? It is probably just an unencrypted number that identifies your record in the database. When you cross the border it does a lookup and displays your photo and other info. Picture doesn't match? You don't get to cross. No point in faking the RFID.

Velcome (1)

Normal Dan (1053064) | more than 6 years ago | (#25043945)

to Amerika

hm (1)

GregNorc (801858) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044227)

It sounds to me like it stores a primary key which corresponds to a database entry on you, rather than storing your personal information. If this is the case, I don't see the huge deal.

No one will know (1)

codepunk (167897) | more than 6 years ago | (#25044355)

SELECT ssn FROM dhs.us_public WHERE dl_rfid='123456';

Not to be concerned I am sure nobody will ever be able to access that data.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?