Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

UK Gov't To Require ID Cards For Some Foreign Residents

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the show-me-a-card-with-your-picture-on-it dept.

Privacy 216

craigavonite, writing "It's looking like the UK is in for biometric ID cards within the next few years, despite widespread protest from groups such as 'NO2ID,'" excerpts from an article at the BBC describing a UK identify card to be issued starting later this year: "The biometric card will be issued from November, initially to non-EU students and marriage visa holders. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said the cards would allow people to 'easily and securely prove their identity.' Critics say the roll-out to some immigrants is a 'softening up' exercise for the introduction of identity cards for everyone."

cancel ×

216 comments

Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163241)

It isn't a big thing. It's an ID card that holds a fingerprint record. How is it bad to tie a card to a person?

"It's looking like the UK is in for biometric ID cards within the next few years, despite widespread protest from groups such as 'NO2I"

Nice troll.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (4, Insightful)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163249)

It isn't a big thing. It's an ID card that holds a fingerprint record. How is it bad to tie a card to a person?

The UK government has shown countless times that it's unable to keep its citzens' data secure.

If someone gets hold of my credit card and CCV number and creates a forgery I ring up and get a new one.

If someone gets hold of my finger prints, what do I do then?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (4, Funny)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163265)

Well, if someone does, it's funnier if you say "pull my finger" first.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Insightful)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163795)

I wanna see you tell unfunny jokes the next time you get pulled out of the airport and dropped in a detention cell because your "pulled" fingerprints appeared on an IED in Iraq or a burglarized weapons depot somewhere in the Ukraine. It's really easy to land on the "no-fly/terror suspect" list nowadays and by granting authorities the right to distribute your data all over the world you basically WANT to be on one of those lists.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Funny)

Konster (252488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163281)

Use another finger. You've got ten of them.

From there, ten toes.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

r33per (585447) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163383)

From there, ten toes

And from there, your ear [newscientist.com] .

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163807)

Idiot, that doesn't solve your problem that YOUR FINGERPRINT is now associated with crimes. Who cares if my official passport has my pinkie print when every time they check my name a "terrorist warning" pops up because my index fingerprint was stolen? That's just bullcrap. And tell that to the nice customs officer that gets all fidgety just when people talk to him that he should check again and explain to him why you had to change the fingerprints and "just this time" you would need to catch your plane. Like they never heard anything like that before.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (4, Insightful)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163293)

No-EU students etc have to have a passport anyway just to be able to come there, so they have an internationally accepted way of identifying themselves.

How will an additional ID card help to do anything?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (5, Insightful)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163363)

They're planning on getting rid of passports for ID cards. It gives them a centralized database, more information on you and as the scope quietly creeps up people will be apathetic until passports are gone and they're squarely in 1984.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

Candid88 (1292486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163623)

You are mistaking passports with visas (and from the article, specifically long-term visas). For decades all developed countries have kept visa information on centralized databases, thats the whole point of issuing visas!

It's pretty certain they won't be replacing passports with ID cards. The two serve completely different functions. An ID card is designed for internal identification within the state wheras passports are for external identification by other states (i.e. allowing you to "pass their port").

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163715)

I don't think I am. Amalgamating cards that serve different functions is a large part of this project. I'm pretty certain that ID cards won't get off the ground, but I'm also certain the plan is to use the ID card as the replacement for every possible form of ID.

After all, they want to track your movements outside the state as well as inside.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

SenseiLeNoir (699164) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163719)

until passports are gone and they're squarely in 1984.

I would be totally impressed, judging by the sheer incompetency of the UK government, if anything like 1984 happens.

Sure they may try, but frankly, its just not going to happen.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0, Troll)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163857)

I would be totally impressed, judging by the sheer incompetency of the UK government, if anything like 1984 happens.

Sure they may try, but frankly, its just not going to happen.

Allow me to break your spirit. I personally believe if there is any nation that will achieve 1984-dom first then it's Great Britain. What says "Not Orwellian" about this:

4 Million surveillance cameras (avg. person gets filmed 300 times a day)
Citizens have to agree to full biometric scan and filing in order to apply for a passport (quote by government: If you don't want to give us your prints that's fine, you don't NEED a passport, you can stay at home).
Engage in terrorism (call me what you want but that the 07/07/07 attacks on the London commuter busses overlapped with a terror training session on the exact same day, in the exact same place at the exact same time according to the government speaks of an inside job to me, at least they knew what was going to happen) and torture (if all "Allied" forces in the Bush coalition used the CIA flights and EU torture prisons why would the Brits not do so?)

To me that all sounds very much like an upcoming police state, sure they don't YET force people to work for government businesses and undergo brain washes but that can't be too far off in UK security policy.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Interesting)

nbert (785663) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163823)

I recently watched a documentary about customs on German TV. They check everything which goes trough Germany by mail somewhere near Frankfurt. They interviewed one guy who is specialized in finding passports. He said he finds dozens of fake Nigerian passports going to the UK every day. They are usually hidden in DVD boxes or simply wrapped in tinfoil. His explanation was that Nigerian passports are rather easy to fake/modify and that it's rather easy to apply for welfare with such a passport in the UK since there is no obligation to register your permanent residence. So with 5 fake passports you can collect welfare 5 times (going to different cities).

I don't know how much of this really works the way he described it, but this seems to be a very good reason to introduce id cards...

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (5, Interesting)

mcwidget (896077) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163317)

If someone gets hold of my finger prints, what do I do then?

From what I've seen with biometrics previously, I doubt that your fingerprint would be stored in any sort of image-like or exportable form. Normally, a hash is taken based on your fingerprint (think GPG singing) and that hash is stored. It's a one way calculation, you can't then turn that hash back into a fingerprint but you can verifiy another fingerprint to the hash.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

JustOK (667959) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163611)

All visitors must wash hands before entering country

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

Isao (153092) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163975)

Yes, it's a hash and not an image. The problem is there are three generally accepted formats for capturing and storing the hash. Assuming for a moment they're equally distributed in the marketplace, losing one means it's usable by the bad guys in 33% of applications. The problem gets worse if there's standardization. The print image isn't needed, it's the hashes (templates) that are compared.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163371)

"citzens' data"

Isn't it Subject's data?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163407)

It used to be. I'm really not so sure any more.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Informative)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163483)

It's not exactly like that. The new biometric cards are safer than the old ones.

In my country we had paper ID cards with fingerprint printed on it. Now we have smard cards and the fingerprint is in a file inside chip, and it's not readable. So, it's actually improving privacy, not making it less.

The card can be used to perform a match-on-card (MOC) operation. You put your finger in a reader and it asks the card if it matches. This way you can validate if someone holding the card is REALLY the card owner. No central fingerprint storage involved.

Also the data inside the card are signed by RSA keys belonging to the government, so you can't create a fake copy of one.

The current paper ID cards are slowly being replaced by the new ones, which is good because forging an old one is very easy, I wouldn't say the same for the new ones.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Informative)

denominateur (194939) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163529)

How exactly is the fingerprint not readable if it, rather than just a hash, is stored on the card?

As for the RSA keys, governments, especially the British, have a very bad track record at keeping data safe. Keys of such importance are a very good target for a social or even technical attack. Knowing the track record, however, they will probably end up on some laptop, usb stick or cd forgotten on a public bus or train, sparing the attacker the effort.

And as to the forging, it may be harder to do it, but once you've done it (and it has been shown that biometric passports deployed in the EU are unsafe right now and can be compromised quite easily http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/nov/17/news.homeaffairs [guardian.co.uk] ) it becomes very hard indeed to disprove that the person holding the passport is not actually the person referenced in the passport / on the ID card. The fingerprints match, the encrypted photograph matches, the RSA keys check out, perfect fraud.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163535)

It's not exactly like that. The new biometric cards are safer than the old ones.

In my country we had paper ID cards with fingerprint printed on it. Now we have smard cards and the fingerprint is in a file inside chip, and it's not readable. So, it's actually improving privacy, not making it less.

The card can be used to perform a match-on-card (MOC) operation. You put your finger in a reader and it asks the card if it matches. This way you can validate if someone holding the card is REALLY the card owner. No central fingerprint storage involved.

Also the data inside the card are signed by RSA keys belonging to the government, so you can't create a fake copy of one.

The current paper ID cards are slowly being replaced by the new ones, which is good because forging an old one is very easy, I wouldn't say the same for the new ones.

A Debian key?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163595)

Does anything rubbery still fool those readers?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

BlackCreek (1004083) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163711)

In my country we had paper ID cards with fingerprint printed on it. Now we have smard cards and the fingerprint is in a file inside chip, and it's not readable. So, it's actually improving privacy, not making it less.

A scanned copy is still a bit-map image of the document, which will be much harder to use in forgeries. A digital copy would be a perfect copy, ready to be burned on another chip. And should be much faster to copy.

Once somebody has a device that circumvents the built in copy protection (have you ever heard of "copy protection" that truly prevents copying?), anyone handling your ID will be able to make a copy of the fingerprints, perhaps even wirelessly.

The clerk at the hotel will only have to have it in his hands for some seconds to pass your ID into his unofficial reader.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (3, Funny)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163605)

If someone gets hold of my finger prints, what do I do then?

Good god, you're right! You'd better wear gloves all the time when outside!

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Insightful)

Candid88 (1292486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163757)

"If someone gets hold of my finger prints, what do I do then?"

Um, anyone who follows you round for a few minutes could probably get hold of your finger prints, without need for an ID card.

That's why police love them so much, it's not like criminals deliberatly leave theirs at crime scenes!

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (4, Insightful)

mcwidget (896077) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163299)

It isn't a big thing. It's an ID card that holds a fingerprint record. How is it bad to tie a card to a person?

It's not the card that's the issue. The problem is that as part of the ID card program the UK Government want a centralised database behind this card that holds personal info on each citizen. To be honest, I don't think it's been clearly defined what the data is but it's expected to be DOB, national insurance number etc. The main concern is that the UK Government has a very poor track record in keeping this type of information secure. If this particular database, containing what most people expect it to contain, is compromised then it's ID theft-galore in the UK.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

AndyboyH (837116) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163481)

Nevermind the UK government's issues with IT projects.

Not one has been delivered on time or on budget - and many are reported as fundamentally broken at the time of rollout.

It's not just the fact they can't keep our data secure - it's also the fact they lack the relevant design and planning for a government IT project to make it work.

So it's not only 1984 except with the liability that the db ends up left on some random laptop/hard drive or lost in the post, but it's 1984 crossed with an expensive white elephant...

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163551)

It's not just the fact they can't keep our data secure

I can see the headlines now. "Unencrypted CD containing names, addresses and nationality of all immigrants falls into BNP hands."

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

AndyboyH (837116) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163687)

*shudders*

Luckily - according to a register article I read, it seems the next in line for the ID cards (airport workers and airline operators) basically are telling the government to f*** off.

They don't want the nightmare or cost of implementing it, and they object that the checks aren't as stringent as the current system they have in place anyway.

Next time there's a baggage handler's strike I think I'll be a little more sympathetic considering they're putting a roadblock in our card-proffering overlord's way. ^_^

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163731)

In fairness most(if not all) of the CD incidents were encrypted.

The secondary concern (1, Informative)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163591)

Is the "paedophile issue". It has been known for years that these people try to get jobs in children's homes, the police and Government departments to facilitate their crimes. The same thing will happen in the UK: professional fraudsters will try to get sleepers in the relevant areas. As "Government" IT is actually done by subcontractors who are not properly policed, this is relatively easy.

We already have a serious UK fraud problem originating in the Indian subcontinent - Mumbai was for many years the identity theft capital of the East, with fraud companies even keeping copies of real government forms going back many years, and annual ink samples, to facilitate document faking. Add these capabilities to those of our home grown criminals, and any identity card scheme actually becomes an identity theft facilitator, not an obstacle.

(And yes, I write from personal experience - I was involved in a UK case where an Indian physician from Mumbai produced forged documents. It was this experience that got me interested in identity theft and security, because he was using faked faxes, and the judge seemed unable to understand how easy this was to do.)

Re:The secondary concern (5, Insightful)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163977)

God I hate the "paedophile issue".
Yes paedophiles exist. No, none of these schemes will do much to stop abuse since the vast majority of abuse is by a family member of friend.

And yet idiots who read the Sun et al are willing to accept anything in the name of fighting paedophiles.
It's the biggest hole in the armour of the civil rights movement too. Since any legislation can be pushed through no matter how absurd if you say it's to combat paedophiles. Said legislation can then be used to arrest whoever you like etc and nobody wants to get killed by a lynch mob for defending "paedophiles"

Socialy it's a crime you can't even be found innocent of.
If a court finds someone innocent no matter how rock solid their defence then "you never know! people are always getting off on technicalities! I saw it in a movie!!".

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163777)

I don't think it's been clearly defined what the data is

Schedule 1 [opsi.gov.uk] of the Identity Cards Act 2006. Note that it's the individual's responsibility to ensure that all that is kept up to date, and failure to e.g. notify the registrar when you move house makes you liable to a fine of £1000.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

mcwidget (896077) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163899)

Good link. What this shows is everything that's entitled to be kept in the identity card database which may/may not be what ends up there. We may find that only some of this information is actually stored.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

IanCal (1243022) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163865)

Here's what they want to store, initially. [homeoffice.gov.uk]

However, they can add data at any time, without informing people.

They will store everywhere you've ever lived, so then know who you've lived with, and who they've lived with. They'll also know who you worked with. As someone with an interest in datamining, this does somewhat concern me. Here's the full act (ID card act of 2006) [opsi.gov.uk]

It can be used to store any data:

for the purposes of the prevention or detection of crime

Nice cop-out, eh? This act gives any government the power to store data for the purposes of detecting people doing things they don't want them to do.

Oh, and under this act, *everyone* over the age of 16:

is entitled to be entered in it

Lucky them.

The act can require you to be present at a certain time to provide all of this information, too. If you don't agree on a time or a place then they will just specify one. Don't do it? You

shall be liable to a civil penalty not exceeding £1,000.

Of course, access to the database is highly restricted, it's restricted to people they want to let access it. Phew, was worried companies might get a hold of it for less than, but it's a good thing the government has never been found to give things in return for money [bbc.co.uk] .

Also, this is all ignoring the small level problems, like a jilted lover working in the government finding out where their ex now lives, etc.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163393)

It isn't bad to tie a card to a person.

The problem is in tying the card to the person while also tying the card to a database.

Why?

Because that provides such a simple means of tracking individuals and monitoring their activities, that a relatively few people will be able to track, monitor and control the many.

That's a problem for democracy and free speech.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163459)

It isn't a big thing. It's an ID card that holds a fingerprint record. How is it bad to tie a card to a person?

"It's looking like the UK is in for biometric ID cards within the next few years, despite widespread protest from groups such as 'NO2I"

Nice troll.

There was a similar push for biometric ID's in germany.

A hacker protest group lifted his prints and published them on a t-shirt.

Including biometric identification info on a card which can be stolen, lost, hacked, or otherwise tampered with is a very good way to assure a security breach has no viable means of recovery.

The implications considering other "biometric" security devices are pretty horrible, especially if the foreign nationals/immigrants in question were brought in to assist high level corporate, defense, or other prestigious research.

Send hooker to foreign Ph. D.'s apartment, copy info on ID card, manufacture a fake fingerprint using the info, walk straight into a BL4 lab and help yourself to a nice engineered strain of small pox

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163543)

Send hooker to foreign Ph. D.'s apartment, copy info on ID card, manufacture a fake fingerprint using the info, walk straight into a BL4 lab and help yourself to a nice engineered strain of small pox

The lab will probably require an access card. If you forge an ID with his identity you may manage to convince lab security you're him and get an access card, but then again - isn't identity theft easier in a world without biometric IDs? I mean, while forging a biometric ID requires access to the ID and expensive technology, what does posing as someone in a world without IDs require?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163601)

isn't identity theft easier in a world without biometric IDs? I mean, while forging a biometric ID requires access to the ID and expensive technology

forging a biometric id is substantially easier than forging others, because they can be measured at a distance or gleaned from any object we touch.

what does posing as someone in a world without IDs require?

I would very much like to see this world without ID's you're talking about.

Last I checked every nation with roads required license plates, driver's licenses, birth and death certificates, etc.

The big difference between these and biometric ID's, as I pointed out before, is you can't apply to the government for a new fingerprint, DNA strand, sub-dermal artery pattern, or retinal pattern.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163581)

> Send hooker to foreign Ph. D.'s apartment,
> copy info on ID card, manufacture a fake
> fingerprint using the info [...]

As opposed to "walk to foreign Ph.D.'s apartment, lift fingerprint from front door handle"?

Your fingerprints are all over the place anyway, so why would anybody go through lots of trouble to "steal" them?

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (2, Interesting)

mcwidget (896077) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163629)

Your fingerprints are all over the place anyway, so why would anybody go through lots of trouble to "steal" them?

Which brings us nicely to the fundamental problem with biometrics. Biometrics provide identity. They do not provide authentication.

Re:Big Fricken Whoop De Woo (1)

ericlondaits (32714) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163903)

In Argentina we've had universal ID cards for as long as I know. They have a number, address, fingerprint and a photograph.

The main problem with them here, I think, is that asking for you ID number is taking for granted for all manner of things. You need to give your ID number for:

- Voting
- Any and all official paperwork
- Banking transactions
- All credit card purchases
- All contests and sweepstakes
- Registering when going into a building
- Subscribing to magazines, fidelity clubs, etc. ... and basically, your personal ID is the de-facto standard database ID for any data related to a person. ... that means that were all this data connected in a single database, it'd give a pretty good picture of what you're up to in life. Like Facebook for law enforcement and criminals. The only thing that keeps us from living in a Big Brother state is Argentina's lack of well stored digital records for most things. Most of the things I mentioned are kept in paper, thrown into a big room somewhere, and never referenced.

In Soviet Britain ... (2, Funny)

DrHyde (134602) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163257)

... card identify YOU

Re:In Soviet Britain ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163793)

Lol, you didn't get your +5 funny there, did you?
Loser :)

Re:In Soviet Britain ... (1)

aproposofwhat (1019098) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163905)

But a +5 SadIndictmentOfNeuesArbeit would be more apt, surely?

Who broke da net? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163259)

IT BE DOWN

SHEZ ALIIIIVE !! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163471)

Igor fetch me my slipperz

and...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163277)

so?

the opposing group is "No2ID" (3, Interesting)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163285)

As in "say no to ID". Makes a lot more sense doesn't it?

Re:the opposing group is "No2ID" (1)

thermian (1267986) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163851)

As in "say no to ID". Makes a lot more sense doesn't it?

They lost my interest when they started spamming me with leaflets after I registered interest. I'm not so inclined to support an organisation that spends so much of its money on maildrops that just end up in the bin with all the other crap.

Stop! (1)

Smivs (1197859) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163315)

Didn't I see an hilarious piece on You Tube [youtube.com] recently about redesigning the Stop Sign? Well these things look the same! What a waste of time and money. I don't even need one...I know who I am.

How do you prove your identity? (1)

SlovakWakko (1025878) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163341)

I live in a post-com country, and we've had identity cards forever. No fingerprins, just photograph, name, and other details. It also has some security features to make forging difficult (but not impossible; unfortunately there's no digital signature for the ID card so far). You can have a look at some examples at http://www.minv.sk/?vzory-dokladov-obcianske-preukazy [www.minv.sk] I can't imagine to live without one. How do you prove your identity without it in a bank, or when you need something from some office (for example new driver's license), etc?

Re:How do you prove your identity? (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163391)

We use a variety of other documents that each provide a small amount of decentralized information. Drivers license, bank statements, utility bills, passport, etc. All of which we're not required to carry at all times, none of which use fixed identifiers such as biometrics.

Re:How do you prove your identity? (1)

delt0r (999393) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163411)

Well as a non EU person in the EU I am required to carry ID everywhere (more or less). It really does not bother me, I mean a cop or border personnel can find out my name and resident status. Big deal so what. Knowing my name is not an invasion of my privacy.

But there is a difference between "here" and "there". The information from boarder crossing etc are well protected by privacy laws here in most of the EU. This is not the case in the US. And as someone has posted below. The fear in the UK is that the ID are backed by a national database with fingerprint information and that sort of thing.

So the fear is not the idea of a ID card per say, but rather the lack of checks and balances in place.

Re:How do you prove your identity? (1)

IanCal (1243022) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163879)

The fear in the UK is that the ID are backed by a national database with fingerprint information and that sort of thing.

Actually, that's required by the ID cards act of 2006 [opsi.gov.uk] .

Re:How do you prove your identity? (1)

supersnail (106701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163429)

Actually in all of post-Napoleonic Europe ID cards are required.

This is pretty much the whole EU apart from the pieces us Brits were sitting
on when Bonaparte made his first attempt at European union
-- UK, Ireland and Malta ( The Ottoman family were administering Greece at the
time but I think they got ID cards in the 1930s).

Mostly these are bits of cardboard with a picture on backed up by a central register.
Though some counties like Belgium have high tech plastic cards with digital signature
capabilities so you can fill in your tax forms online.

As far as I know nobody has bothered with biometrics etc. because they are pretty
pointless. All important data is held on central registers/ data abses and the
main verification process is done through the mind-numingly tedious, old-fashioned
but thourough process of registering at the town hall whenever you change address.

 

Re:How do you prove your identity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163449)

I don't understand this opposition to ID cards either.
For example, from what I understand, in the USA, if you have a person's name and social security number you can fool a bank and make a loan in that person's name. Isn't this much easier and more dangerous than forging an ID card?

Where to begin. (5, Insightful)

supersnail (106701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163345)

1. It wont stop illegal working.
      Anyone who is supposed to have such a card but doesnt can just pretend to be on of the 99.9%
      of the population that is not required to have the card.

2. Whats the point of the frigging fingerprint?
      Who has got the both tha equipemnt and the right to check it?

3. The variously elected and appointed idiots are in thrall to various "consultants".
      To paraphrase Warren Buffets immortal words "Never ask a consultant if you need an overpriced solution".

4. Lastly but most importantly -- there is no "problem".
      Various candidates for the problem to which id cards are the solution have been proposed and they have
      all been found wanting.
      First it was terrorism -- but it was pointed out that all known serious terroist attacks in hte UK
      were carried out by terrorists using thier real names, and, that at no point in the leadup to any attack
      were they required to identify themselves.
      Second it was illegal immigration -- but some 350 million EU citizens have the right to work in the UK
      anyway, the much villified asylum seekers are attempting to immigrate legally, plus nobody is going
      to check the documents of thier Russian nanny or Morrocan cleaner.
      Thirdly it was "identity theft" -- but if the banks give money/credit to unverified strangers it is
      thier problem. For this to be effective lenders would need to have; the equipment to read the card,
      the right to ask for a fingerprint and access to the central database to verify the validity of the
      card.

      Currently Jaqi Smith cannot come up with any reasonable justification for this system at all but is
      still pressing ahead with a system that will dump billions into the coffers of the "usual suspects"
      Accenture, EDS (now HP), CAP and IBM.

Well at least the labour party will be more or less extinct in a years time, but the civil servants who
are pushing this idea will still be there, and the Conservatives look even more prone to SnakeOil salesman that the incumbent idiots.
                         

Re:Where to begin. (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163475)

Anyone who is supposed to have such a card but doesnt can just pretend to be on of the 99.9% of the population that is not required to have the card.

It's not like most employers don't know their workers are illegal.

Lastly but most importantly -- there is no "problem".

Certainly true. Classic case of a solution looking for a problem.

Re:Where to begin. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163739)

Lastly but most importantly -- there is no "problem".

Certainly true. Classic case of a solution looking for a problem.

You guys don't really know what's going on, right?

It's all a big chess game. They moved another piece, and 8 moves ahead, they have achieved government lock-in.

All governments of the world are slowly marching towards their innevitable clash. Achieving maximum control of their respective populations is a pre-requisite on the tech tree of this giant RTS game that is to come. Let's just hope it's a wonders of the world race instead of conquest mode.

Re:Where to begin. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163599)

the Conservatives look even more prone to SnakeOil salesman that the incumbent idiots.

To be fair, all the opposition parties (Conservatives [conservatives.com] , Liberal Democrats [libdems.org.uk] , SNP [snp.org] ) oppose ID cards and say they would scrap them, if elected. Labour are trying to hurry things through before the next election, in the hope of getting far enough that it will be hard to turn back.

Re:Where to begin. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163681)

No problem? Terrorists! Child porn! Porn of child terrorists! Criticism of the government! How can you /say/ there's no problem, you insensitive clod! THINK OF THE CHILDREN

In 100 yrs, there'll be no more English in England (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163811)

You'll all have committed demographic suicide. Don't worry, though. Your little brother the U.S. is deep into it's own process of a silent Mexican invasion. Eventually, poor and ignorant people from 3td world shitholes will have ruined what once were glorious and powerful nations.

Re:Where to begin. (1)

BlackCreek (1004083) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163881)

4. Lastly but most importantly -- there is no "problem". Various candidates for the problem to which id cards are the solution have been proposed and they have all been found wanting.

Very nice post. But I disagree on a minor thing with it. When you said there is no problem, you should have said there is no "justification". IMHO the "problem" that they are trying to solve is "lack of total control over population", and as such it exists.

BTW, a good movie to watch about the UK is Taking Liberties [rottentomatoes.com] .

Re:Where to begin. (1)

tangent3 (449222) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163925)

I'm going to reply from the point of view of a citizen of one of the many countries (in this case, Singapore) outside the US and the UK that have successfully deployed an ID system for many decades.

1. It wont stop illegal working. Anyone who is supposed to have such a card but doesnt can just pretend to be on of the 99.9% of the population that is not required to have the card.
This is true. In order for this to work, the whole population is required to have an ID.

2. Whats the point of the frigging fingerprint? Who has got the both tha equipemnt and the right to check it?
The fingerprint is printed on the ID and provides proof of ownership of the ID itself. If your fingerprint matches that of the ID, then you are the valid owner of the ID. If it doesn't match, then the ID is probably stolen.

You do not need special equipment to check the fingerprint, it can be done manually with stamp ink and a piece of paper.

Only the police has the right to demand an ID or fingerprint check. However, you may be refused entry into a building or services of a bank if you do not provide your ID or fingerprint. In this case it is deemed that you grant the rights for the check in exchange for entry or service.

Second it was illegal immigration -- but some 350 million EU citizens have the right to work in the UK anyway, the much villified asylum seekers are attempting to immigrate legally, plus nobody is going to check the documents of thier Russian nanny or Morrocan cleaner.

Here in Singapore, anyone caught in employ of an illegal immigrant is considered guilty of harboring, and there are stiff penalties for this, in many cases leading to jail terms.

Thirdly it was "identity theft" -- but if the banks give money/credit to unverified strangers it is thier problem. For this to be effective lenders would need to have; the equipment to read the card, the right to ask for a fingerprint and access to the central database to verify the validity of the card.

The equipment and the right I've covered earlier.

Cards have a serial number to go with the individual's identity number. It's a simple check against a central database to ensure that the two numbers match for the card to be valid. Replacements for stolen/lost cards will of course have a different serial number for the same identity number.

It's not a perfect system, of course. While the cards are hard to forge, it's not impossible. And not all service providers will go through all the available security measures. Depending on the level of service provided, fingerprint or validity check may be skipped.

However it's definitely a far better system than a system like SSN where all you need to do is provide a number to identify yourself.

Re:Where to begin. (5, Insightful)

Aceticon (140883) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163943)

I'm actually from an European country which has ID cards and i'm living in the UK at the moment.

My ID card is actually quite handy as means of identification since it's basically a plastified card with my photo and thumbprint on it, small enough to fit in my wallet and accepted everywhere in Europe as means of identification.

That said, here is why i am firmly against ID cards in the UK:

  • The UK has the most duplicitious set of politicians I've seen in all the countries in Europe i've lived in. These guys will say one thing one day, a different thing the next day and yet a third thing the following day. The top politicians have few boundaries and will make and pass laws not on the merits of the law but for reasons like "to get more votes" or "to project an image of being a strong Prime-Minister". This is how, for example, the 30 days detention without trial law was extended to 45 days (the PM needed to look strong and shore up votes)
  • Small powers are constantly abused around here. City councils using anti-terrorist laws to spy on people suspected of letting their dogs foul the pavement, people forced to pay on the spot fines for "dirtying the street" when their little child let a piece of cake fall to the pavement, Health and Safety rules used to stop perfectly legit gatherings 'cause "there is a danger that people might hurt themselfs", traffic cameras and payed parking setup all over the place purelly (often openly admited) for the purposed of making money from the fines.
  • The top police officers are power hungry and currupt (not currupt in a "getting payed by crooks currupt" but instead currupt in a "doing whatever i takes to get and keep personal previledges" kind of way)
  • The UK electorate is shallow, ignorant, clueless and easy to deceive with light and mirrors shows. This is the country of the "celeb" (celebrity) cult where being on Big Brother can propel you from being a nobody to being constantly followed by the local papparazzi. Local newspapers have by far the largest amount of space dedicated to celeb and gossip "news" of all Europe - and yet the vast majority of celebs are actually nobodies. IMHO, this is why local politicians say the most outrageous lies (and contradict themselfs the next day) and people still vote for them.
  • There is no space for freedom and privacy in the laws around here: 45 days of detention without trial; anti-terrorist laws so open that you can be detained just by looking sideways at a cop or criticizing a politician at an open meeting (real case); a circle of 1 mile around the parliement where you can be detained for "unlawfull demonstration" if you simply raise your voice while criticising anything; a DNA database with the DNA of everybody ever detained by the police (including children) even if not prosecuted for anything; the highest density of surveilance cameras per-capita of the whole world

The problem aren't the ID cards, the problem is that the local institutions and politicians cannot be trusted with anything that can be (mis-)used for surveilance or constrol of people.

pointless (2, Insightful)

muftak (636261) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163373)

How do they tell the difference between someone that is foreign and someone that just looks foreign? Any black person can just claim they are a British citizen, so don't need an ID card.

Sigh (1, Troll)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163421)

this is just the first part, sooner or later everone will have one, so your argument is null and void. As well as pretty stupid.

For now you can claim that you don't need a card. This will pass with time. That is the entire plan. Start small, then slowly get everyone to have to ID themselves.

Sometimes you wonder how the goverment can introduce such schemes without people protesting and then you see people like you and you know why. The voter is stupid.

Re:Sigh (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163465)

Yes, the voter is stupid. That's why whenever there is a bombing I chuckle. Stupid bastard cancers deserve to be blown up.

Re:Sigh (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163571)

Yes, the voter is stupid. That's why whenever there is a bombing I chuckle. Stupid bastard cancers deserve to be blown up.

When have you last heard a report say "first the terrorists released all the slashdot posters"?

ireland (1)

ionix5891 (1228718) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163399)

They already have biometric Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) plastic cards with chip and other info on you here in Ireland (Republic of) for non nationals, and it must be on you at all times...

So? (-1, Redundant)

crossmr (957846) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163501)

Is this really a big deal?
What's wrong with carrying an ID card? Don't the british carry their drivers license? (its what an ID card is in Canada) How do you ID at pubs?

Now that I'm in South Korea I had to get a foreign residents card. Actually I prefer it. You're supposed to carry your passport or the card on you at all time. I prefer to accidentally lose the card than accidentally lose my passport (which I can keep locked up somewhere secure). Yes I'd prefer not to accidentally lose either, but the card is far less of a hassle.

Re:So? (1)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163545)

The catch is that places like Germany, where ID cards aren't a big problem, happen to have strong Constitutional protection on personal rights, freedom and information. Britain doesn't have that.

Re: So? (1)

augustw (785088) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163585)

Don't the british carry their drivers license?

No, because we're not required to. We can be asked by a police officer, with due cause, to produce it within 7 days at a police station of our chosing.

How do you ID at pubs?

Unless you look too young to drink, and so have to prove your age to the barman, there's no requirement for ID there. Ever.

Hell, we don't even have to produce ID to vote!

Re:So? (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163597)

Don't the british carry their drivers license? (its what an ID card is in Canada)

No. Well, only if I'm hiring a van.
How do you ID at pubs?

I've never been asked for ID in a pub, since I was 18.

Re:So? (1)

Hanners1979 (959741) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163621)

Is this really a big deal? What's wrong with carrying an ID card?

I think the issue for many of us (living in the UK as I do) isn't so much that we don't want an ID card as it is that we don't trust the current government with using them (and the data they contain) properly. This is the government that has seen various agencies lose and fail to secure vast amounts of personal data on the one hand, and on the other increased exponentially the ways in which they can monitor and survey everything we do.

ID cards would certainly have their uses, but right now we don't have a government we can trust to deploy and use them properly.

Re:So? (1)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163873)

A large part of the problem is the decentralised nature of government data. One department may know something, another department may know something else. You end up with the need to transfer data between departments, and that's when accidents happen.

The solution to this could be a more centralised system, and that's what the government should be marketing the ID database as. It would seem foolish to complain about the government's record on data storage and then oppose the solution (not that that would stop anybody I suppose).

Re:So? (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163625)

There are multiple problems with ID cards

If the information held on you is wrong (which from past experience it will be ...) it will be almost impossible to get it changed

If I want to get one in someone else's name it will be pitifully easy : how do I prove I am me without an ID card ....I can't to any reasonable degree, but I can prove I am someone else to the degree the passport regulations require

It will be relatively simple to forge, and far too trusted to be unforgeable

It will not actually help with any of the problems stated
    Illegal workers will still work
    Terrorists will use their real names as they have always done
    Benefit fraudsters will still lie
    Organised crime will forge the cards as they do passports now...

It seems to be a solution that no-one wants looking for a problem

Re:So? (3, Interesting)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163677)

What's wrong with carrying an ID card?

Well, some people (who, presumably, live in the woods, don't have bank account, don't drive a car and never leave the country) just object on principle. Personally, I don't see that one: in this world you need to prove your identity from time to time, and without having a "proper" identity scheme we end up using all sorts of inappropriate kludges (e.g. banks tend to ask for a gas or electricity bill).

Then there's the fear of police having the power to stop people and demand "papers". Now, that's a legitimate fear demanding eternal vigilance and all that but its really got naff all to do with ID cards: there's nothing fundamental about ID cards which says that police have to be given the power to inspect them. Plus, if the Fascists take over then it will take them a whole week to print and issue "papers".

Now we get to the more serious objections - primarily "mission creep". If the Government were simply rolling out a better alternative to current "ad hoc" methods of identity checking then it wouldn't be so bad. However, these are being touted as the answer to terrorism, fraud, illegal immigrants, healthcare provision and whatever was on the front page of the Daily Mail yesterday. Consequently, more and more bells and whistles are being added, meaning more and more information about individuals will be gathered to protect us against the barbarians at the gate, but will probably end up being used to police dog fouling [bbc.co.uk] .

Finally, even if the conspiracy theorists are right, the government's track record on large IT projects doesn't bode well. (1984 is scary enough, but Brazil is even scarier!) Currently, we're getting almost daily stories of government departments losing laptops, CDs and memory sticks containing personal information, which doesn't help.

Re:So? (3, Insightful)

giafly (926567) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163727)

in this world you need to prove your identity from time to time, and without having a "proper" identity scheme we end up using all sorts of inappropriate kludges (e.g. banks tend to ask for a gas or electricity bill)

I think I've only had to "prove my identity" twice in the last five years: once when I did jury service, and the second time was to my company accountants because of money laundering regulations or something. This is so infrequent that any extra benefit of simpler ID is much, much less than the additional risks of the government losing my data.

Re:So? (1)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163897)

Plus, if the Fascists take over then it will take them a whole week to print and issue "papers".

A week? Don't say that, it makes them sound so efficient that people might actually consider them a more credible government than the one we have at present!

All terrorists required to have one (2, Insightful)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163537)

Identity cards introduced for those foreign Johnnies, not you [today.com] . "The card will be compulsory for foreign nationals. All terrorists and illegal immigrants will be required to obtain one and show it to policemen, council officials or dog catchers on request. LOOK! TERRORISTS!"

This is largely from (a) civil servants who think it'd be convenient to their jobs to have everyone filed and numbered (b) private contractors like EDS and Capita who have been promised CASH CASH CASH for consulting on such schemes, and certainly don't have a track record of employing ex-goverment ministers and senior civil servants at vast consulting fees 12 months after they leave the government. Well, maybe a bit of a track record.

The ridiculous thing is that this is a creature of the Labour government, who are vastly unpopular, and will likely be kicked out on their corrupt arses in the 2010 election. This scheme is set only to be fully implemented by 2011/2012. EDS and Crapita will, of course, still be paid in full.

This is a big deal, but old news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163569)

The UK already requires anyone entering on a short-term visa (i.e. fiancee or proposed civil partnership) to get their biometric data taken (all 10 fingerprints and facial scan), it is just that this information is not carried on an easily lost or stolen card. As someone in the tech industry, it scares me enough that government has my biometric information, but to then put it on a card? There is no way this is secure and certainly not accomplishing any of the its goals (except to perhaps make more money for the companies involved, as someone else mentioned).

I love it - what a cynical abuse of xenophobia (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163633)

Wow, what a class act. Let's inflict this evil on Johnny Foreigner, shall we? It's just as bad and risk prone for them to hand over their inside leg measurement to a government desperately seeking more contractors to blame their avalanche of data loss on, but hey, they're foreigners so that ought to be OK. Nobody will be campaigning for them, surely?

Every time I think the current UK government has reached the lowest of the low they amaze me by finding new ways to dig. I guess that's why they call it NEW Labour - it can pretend to be Labour but isn't, and it can pretend to be business friendly which it isn't either. It's hot air, spin and as huge a risk to the future to the UK and the current US government is to the US, no wonder they got on so well.

The current ID card schemes are unacceptable, and plenty of advise has been given how to correct it. All that is happening here is a last minute panic to try and land the new government with a huge mess to unpick, not that that pile needs any adding.

It's time to bring personal responsibility back to those clowns. It's needed.

new eyeballs, please. (1)

aristolochene (997556) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163655)

because once your biometric details are stolen it's easy to replace/reset them.......

Why target foreigners? (1)

Sprotch (832431) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163663)

What is the logic behind targetting foreigners first? The obvious answer is that the population is less likely to protest. I suspect some not-so-thinly veiled xenophobia.

Its a tax raising exercise (1)

trash eighty (457611) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163673)

Its a new stealth tax, just like how the fee to get permanent residency has gone up about 300% in just a few years. No doubt there will be a nice hefty fee to get this card and no one will care because its immigrants paying right?

another perspective (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163723)

In the country I live in (Malta), *everyone* has an ID card. How was it imposed? It wasn't but if you want to:

- Sit for an exam
- Require *any* government service (+ motoring +insurance etc)
- Vote
- Open a bank account
- Etc

you will need an ID. You don't "ask" for an ID card, you get one assigned to you upon birth registration.

Even local business ask for it sometimes because it makes locating your record easy. Seriously what's the problem with a having a document saying that you are number #123456 ? That's all it boils down to!

UK passports are already biometric.. (3, Insightful)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163763)

Maybe the data isn't stored on the RFID in the passport. But there's the headshot ; such an obvious biometric that people forget about it.

What many people noticed on applying for a UK passport recently was the leaflet that came with the form telling you exactly how to pose for your photograph... you were only allowed certain margins, certain backgrounds, you had to face forward, you had to take off your glasses. It was pretty clear to those with a technical bent that the photograph was intended for consumption by a computer, so I'd suggest that anyone with a recent UK passport is already in a large database of facial geometry metrics somewhere in the Home Office (and maybe on your passport chip too). This would mean that you are ripe for rapid recognition from any sufficiently detailed CCTV footage ; and as we know, the UK has more CCTV cameras than anywhere else in the world. Nice.

Now, people don't habitually carry their passport in the UK, partly because it's a valuable document, partly because you don't need it for everyday usage, and partly because of the form factor - a little red book that doesn't conveniently fit into your pocket without the risk of being bent. A credit card sized ID on the other hand, is VERY easy to slip into your wallet and forget about.

If I were the UK government wanting to promote the routine carrying of an RFID enabled ID, I'd make the UK passport modular - a red book for the visa stamps, with a pocket in the back to carry the wallet-sized photo / RFID card when you're travelling. A lot of people would take to carrying their "passport card" routinely because suddenly, it's convenient.

Many is the time I've turned up at a place and found I needed a photo-ID or my passport and not had one, buying foreign currency, for example. It would probably work on me (after I put the tinfoil weave in my wallet, of course).

Re:UK passports are already biometric.. (1)

crimperman (225941) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163923)

Maybe the data isn't stored on the RFID in the passport.

And there is most people's problem. It's not the card but the data storage. Specifically who has authorised access to it and also how secure it really is what with the number of government data-leaks there have been in the UK lately.

What many people noticed on applying for a UK passport recently was the leaflet that came with the form telling you exactly how to pose for your photograph

And that anybody over 16 must sign their own passport - this is a new requirement and it is causing havoc for families with disabled kids. I work for a disability charity and we've had parents bemoaning that they just can't get their disabled child to not smile when they sit in front of a camera - let alone stay still! But UK gov has made no provision for this - effectively telling disabled children they cannot have a passport.

Many is the time I've turned up at a place and found I needed a photo-ID or my passport and not had one, buying foreign currency, for example.

I take it you have an old-style paper driving licence then (or no driving licence). The modular style passport you mention is already in place in driving licences. Any "need" for an ID card being needed to prove who I am can be usually met by my driving licence - which proves who I am without all the other stuff.

Guess its time... (1)

Valcrus (1242564) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163765)

To pull out my copy of 1984 so I can refresh myself on how I need to act in the future.

Your Papers please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163773)

"I need to know who you are, where you're coming from, where you're going to and why. Now."

ugly (1)

kikito (971480) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163813)

They would not have come up with an uglier design if they had tried.

Feature creep (3, Interesting)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163821)

The issue as I see it is this.
At present I carry a passport, a driving licence, another chipped card for the tacho in the truck and various other cards for entitlement to drive various machinery.
The lame brained would say it is more convenient to have all the relevant data stored on one card. I disagree.
If I travel to a foreign country, I need a passport and maybe my driving licence (to hire a car). If I don't travel, I don't need the passport - why should I prove my entitlement to travel if I am in my native country ? Why should I open my complete life to inspection every time I "prove" my identity. The passport application process surely proves my right to be here. My driving licence proves my entitlement to drive on public roads in the UK, why should it identify me to the immigration dept. too ?
There will gradually be feature creep in the system leading to even your bank cards migrating onto this one evil card. Fine you say, less to carry around. Except that you will be required to use it more and more to gain access to anything. This means your entire life is recorded - which roads you used and when, what you bought and where, who was nearby when you drove and or bought anything etc etc.
The question you should be asking is not, can the cards be forged ? The question should be - can the system be hacked ?
Is there anybody here that thinks that any networked computer can be hack proof ? In that case, what happens when somebody breaks in and uses YOUR primary key to create a totally ficticious chain of events placing you in the vicinity of a robbery, murder, terrorist act, or even in the same building as other known criminals. As far as the police are concerned, the system doesn't lie and since your card contains your finger prints, it can't be anyone other than you that the records refer to. Not a problem ? Well not a problem until you are late for a train and they think you are about to set off a bomb and decide to shoot first and ask questions later. Quite a bit of incentive for terrorists there I think. Create a false trail for themselves, showing nothing but innocent activity, and a damning trail for some innocent who will be miles away from the action but conveniently will have the police trailing them, not the terrorists.
Bad idea.

Question: Is this just new applicants? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163827)

The roll out to foreign nationals on spousal visa's, I understand that they can give you a card when you apply to extend your leave to remain, but my wife already has an indefinate leave to remain stamp in her passport, as far as we are concerned her deals with the Home Office are done. How are they to roll this out to the many many thousands who are already permanantly settled in the UK? We have moved a number of times since indefinate leave to remain was given, so sending a letter to the last known address isn't going to help them.

Scary (2, Insightful)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 5 years ago | (#25163855)

It's scary how V for Vendetta is slowly turning from a work of fiction into a documentary.

see you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25163931)

wait until they put RFID in it, and RFID scanners in shops, subway, busses etc. then you can see where you where, and everyone an see everywhere you have been, all your life. probably stored foreever in some central system.

prepare for the complete end of privacy.

want to see you mistress? well.. be prepared for some blackmail from the overseers..

homo? don't want to tell. if you get famous, someone else will tell..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...