PDA

View Full Version : ID cards 'could threaten privacy'


heli_port
8th Jun 2008, 09:37
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7441693.stm


The government should limit the data it collects on citizens for its ID card scheme to avoid creating a surveillance society, a group of MPs has warned.
The home affairs select committee called for proper safeguards on the plans for compulsory ID cards to stop "function creep" threatening privacy.

Utrinque Apparatus
8th Jun 2008, 09:46
Too late :hmm: New Labour has a pathological disregard for liberty since it threatens their grip on the country. Perhaps they'll just put all the data on a couple of discs, and lose them again for complete security.

weido_salt
8th Jun 2008, 10:05
"ID cards 'could threaten privacy' (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=4167561#post4167561) "

Wrong! It WILL threaten our privacy!! Soon we will not be able to "break wind" without them knowing.

The noose is gradually tightening and soon we will all be told what to do, when and how. All part of the plan and so far, it is going according to plan.

The EU is a very big link in the chain. We are all being led like lambs to the slaughter.

tony draper
8th Jun 2008, 10:16
Said this before, there are over sixty million of us wandering about this country now and a ever increasing number of us up to no good,a local Bobby on a bike with a whistle and truncheon no longer cuts it.
Thing on the news tother day, those Nigerian scammers no longer operating from home they have all moved here, nowt like being near you place of work.
Said this before as well, bollix to ID cards, Chip everybody.
:cool:

spannerless
8th Jun 2008, 11:11
Haven't they already?

Chipped our bin, Tapped our mobiles to see where we are on the pretense of seeing our movement habits, Passed laws on our private rights with no consultation, the only ones free are the criminals who don't give a toss what laws they pass.

Laws only effect the law abiding or haven't the sun readers out there worked that out yet?

Said this before, there are over sixty million of us wandering about this country now and a ever increasing number of us up to no good,a local Bobby on a bike with a whistle and truncheon no longer cuts it.
Thing on the news tother day, those Nigerian scammers no longer operating from home they have all moved here, nowt like being near you place of work.
Said this before as well, bollix to ID cards, Chip everybody.

:E

Krystal n chips
8th Jun 2008, 11:16
:hmm: It's been mentioned before by those of us who feel "less than enamoured" to this "for your own good" concept......NO problem with holding / carrying an ID card.....MAJOR problem with Gov't IT security, subliminal data.......and every so called "stakeholder partnership" :yuk: little assine cretin who feels it's their "right" to access my data......have I got anything to hide......yep, it's called my personal life !!!......not involved in criminal activities, pay taxes / insurance etc....so what f$%king business is it of some "state employed" bonzo to track me and where I go / what I do and also my past history to-date....which, with one stroke of a key pad could be woefully wrong......and I would never know as those responsible never make errors...and even if they do, the attitude is "so what!".

Will you be taking Fish, salt and vinegar with yours Mr D ? :p:E

Avitor
8th Jun 2008, 11:17
ID cards will not be safe, they will studiously be copied in the Casbah's and dungeons around the world.
To date, far too much 'protected' data has reached the eyes of all and sundry.

Blacksheep
8th Jun 2008, 11:34
I used to be inclined to ignore terrorism because I mistook the latest terrorists as being like the old ones we became inured to. Unfortunately, it is now clear that they're not like the IRA who had a political objective. Living among us are people who intend to kill all infidels. Thats us; all of us, whether atheist or christian, muslim or jew, we're all infidels in their twisted theology. They have no achievable political objective over which we can negotiate; the end game is the total elimination of all who disagree with them. Nothing less will satisfy them.

They hide among us, we sit next to them on the bus, we share our shopping trolleys with them, they teach our children and treat our sick. The world has changed and we must accept that, as tony just said, we can no longer rely on bobbies with a whistle. We need to make it impossible for those intent upon mass murder to hide behind civil liberties in going about their diabolical business. Even if that means surrendering some of our privacy.

Wig Wag
8th Jun 2008, 11:39
What I can't figure out is why BALPA are being so ruddy wet about ID Cards. It's a no brainer that pilots will be against the scheme. So why don't BALPA organise a petition amongst the members and it send off to Gordon Brown? It would surely be a popular move and might help the cause.

G-CPTN
8th Jun 2008, 13:45
What I can't figure out is why BALPA are being so ruddy wet about ID Cards.For fear of being accused of being 'part of the problem'?

Overdrive
8th Jun 2008, 15:41
We need to make it impossible for those intent upon mass murder to hide behind civil liberties in going about their diabolical business. Even if that means surrendering some of our privacy.


Whilst respecting your views Blacksheep, that sounds like it could've been written by a New Labour spin doctor. I know people have been maimed and killed, and I don't belittle it to those who have suffered. However, in the brutal realm of statitics that reflect the real risks of life, it is still an infinitessimaly small risk of ever laying eyes on a terrorist or potential terrorist (unknowingly or otherwise), let alone falling victim.

The very necessary actions to combat the threat as it actually exists should be commensurate, not designed to provide ever-expandable future benefits of social control and commercial exploitation, for that is the real thrust of the ID card scheme, in my opinion and that of many others.

ID cards will do nothing to prevent committed terrorists, but they do have the potential to very efficiently (and unavoidably) do many things to change and hamper our lives, in ways that will never recede once entrenched. To cite the use of ID from decades ago, or even in current forms as some do, as an attempt to mollify peoples' concerns is wholly irrelevant. With the pace of development of technology, I think we will be stunned what those minscule little chips will be able to do in a few very short years. It's a very dangerous road... more dangerous in a sense than terrorism has been or will be.

That warm March Saturday in 1993 in Warrington... I was in my car 100 yards away from those explosions. My then girlfriend and several others that I know were shopping in the town. Two were near enough to get blown and dusted by it. As I recall, despite the sad deaths of two local boys, people carried on as normal, people went shopping as normal the next week, as they had following the previous event the month before. The perpetrators were condemed, events were of course discussed... but back then there was an almost tacit perception of the actual risk of it happening again, that was more realistic. It's a very rare event.

Nowadays, the fear is cultivated and milked like never before... but is the risk any higher? Go with the 42 days, hold them if there is the merest shred that they are at it (as discussed in a recent thread). Structure the anti-terrorism laws so that they cannot be used to prevent 88-year-old hecklers from re-entering the Labour party conference (or any other "handy" interpretation), but can be used to incarcerate or throw these loonies out as they are discovered, forthwith, without any human rights bullsh*t. If that's how it is now... then change it. To fight terrorism, go after terrorists, not the other 99.999% of the population.

Overdrive
8th Jun 2008, 15:50
As I type, there is a huggy on BBC World declaiming that over-reaction is exactly what Al Qaeda want. That is not the case. Their declared aim is to kill all infidels and the only reasonable response must be to eliminate all of them. That requires intelligence on their organizational structure, their finances, their communications and ultimately to make it impossible for them to operate from within our own society.

Blacksheep, I've just read this that you posted on another thread. Now that I do agree with.

Legalapproach
8th Jun 2008, 15:58
Those video screens that feature in Orwell's 1984 would be a marvelous weapon in the war against burglary (as well as the war against terrorism). If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear from them. Of course I suspect that just as in 1984 our rulers would have the ability to turn them off but then, unlike us, they can be trusted.

Wig Wag
8th Jun 2008, 16:31
What I can't figure out is why BALPA are being so ruddy wet about ID Cards.

Reply:

For fear of being accused of being 'part of the problem'?

Can you expand on your argument?

Blacksheep
8th Jun 2008, 20:15
that sounds like it could've been written by a New Labour spin doctor.I'm quite a long way off being a Labour party apologist though. ;)

Until February I carried a National ID card with an embedded chip that had my bio-data and a copy of my fingerprints embedded in it. I needed to produce it whenever I used a government service - renewing my driving licence, taxing my car, getting electricity and water connected if I moved house, registering for medical treatment and so on. The objective of the card was to limit serives to citizens and legal residents. There was no way to forge one and no way a government servant could cancel it once it was issued. Mrs. B has a Malaysian "Smart ID" card as well. They were introduced to deal with a massive illegal immigration problem with a great deal of success. It may be possible to forge a card, but creating a matching data entry in the national database is a different matter. Carrying a forged ID is tantamount to carrying proof of being illegal.

Gingerbread Man
8th Jun 2008, 22:22
While the above clearly proves who you are, how does it prove or disprove whether you are a terrorist? This is where I fall down on understanding why I need an ID card.

Yarpy
9th Jun 2008, 10:32
Essential reading today is the Home Affairs Select Committe report on the Surveillance Society:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmhaff/58/58i.pdf

Summary

In the design of its policies and systems for collecting data, the Government should adopt a principle of data minimisation: it should collect only what is essential, to be stored only for as long as is necessary.
We call on the Government to give proper consideration to the risks associated with excessive surveillance. Loss of privacy through excessive surveillance erodes trust between the individual and the Government and can change the nature of the relationship between citizen and state. The decision to use surveillance should always involve a publicly-documented process of weighing up the benefits against the risks, including security breaches and the consequences of unnecessary intrusion into individuals’ private lives.
Our Report sets out a series of ground rules for Government and its agencies to build and preserve trust. Unless trust in the Government’s intentions in relation to data collection, retention and sharing is carefully preserved, there is a danger that our society could become a surveillance society.
The potential for surveillance of citizens in public spaces and private communications has increased dramatically over the last decade, making it possible for what the Information Commissioner calls “the electronic footprint” we leave in our daily lives to be built up into a detailed picture of our activities. This has prompted growing concern about a wide range of issues relating to the collection and retention of information about individuals.
The commercial sector has driven a great many of the developments in this area, recognising the competitive advantage that information about customers can bring when used to target marketing and design personalised services. Government has also sought to harness this capability, to meet public expectations for similarly tailored and convenient services. Advances in technology have influenced the public’s ideas about what it can deliver for the prevention and investigation of crime. The outcome has been the collection and sharing of increasing amounts of personal information.
The collection of personal information by public and private sector bodies can have clear benefits for the consumer, the patient and the recipient of public sector services. But it also involves significant risk. Mistakes in or misuse of databases can cause substantial practical harm to individuals—particularly those who have little awareness of or control over how their information is used.
The Government should make full use of technical means of protecting personal information and preventing unwarranted monitoring of individuals’ activities. But safeguards are as much a matter of policy and protocol as of technology: the Government should also carry out rigorous risk analysis of any proposal to establish major new databases or other systems for collecting data, take full responsibility for protecting personal information, and ensure that its policies and procedures in relation to data collection and storage are as transparent as possible.
We examined aspects of the Home Office’s responsibilities in relation to the collection and sharing of personal information—including CCTV or video surveillance, identity cards
6 A Surveillance Society?
and the National DNA Database—and considered how information collected in other public and private sector databases might be shared for use in the fight against crime. We recommend that the Home Office exercise restraint in collecting personal information, and address the question of whether or not surveillance activities represent proportionate responses to threats of varying degrees of severity.

G-CPTN
9th Jun 2008, 11:15
Quote:
What I can't figure out is why BALPA are being so ruddy wet about ID Cards.
Reply:
Quote:
For fear of being accused of being 'part of the problem'?
Can you expand on your argument?
Once a 'community' is subjected to controls (such as having to carry identity cards) they inevitably become a centre of interest (instead of being anonymous) and subject to increased scrutiny.
Whilst, undoubtedly, the overwhelming majority (if not all) aircrew are never involved in any terrorism, the chance that some activities might seem to be suspicious when examined in detail by overzealous investigators might lead them to find 'evidence' where none really exists.

It's easy to say "If you've got nothing to fear", but there are few among the populace who could withstand close scrutiny of their background by authorities determined to set someone up.

B Sousa
9th Jun 2008, 12:24
"ID cards 'could threaten privacy' (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=4167561#post4167561) "


If you are in the US or UK today and you think you have privacy you definitely have your head frimly planted up your backside.
Might as well face it and come out with National ID cards, at least those who should not have them wont have them...........hopefully.

Wig Wag
9th Jun 2008, 17:35
Once a 'community' is subjected to controls (such as having to carry identity cards) they inevitably become a centre of interest (instead of being anonymous) and subject to increased scrutiny.
Whilst, undoubtedly, the overwhelming majority (if not all) aircrew are never involved in any terrorism, the chance that some activities might seem to be suspicious when examined in detail by overzealous investigators might lead them to find 'evidence' where none really exists.

It's easy to say "If you've got nothing to fear", but there are few among the populace who could withstand close scrutiny of their background by authorities determined to set someone up.

Fine. That's a good argument against ID Cards and nicely put if I might say so.

Why cannot BALPA come out and argue in a similar vein?

All we have had (to my knowledge) is a press release and a small notice in the LOG.

What are they thinking in HQ or . . . Are they thinking at all?

Blacksheep
9th Jun 2008, 18:16
I didn't think the ID card was an anti-terrorist move, rather it is designed to winkle out the uninvited guests.

In the interests of privacy, maybe I should burn my birth certificate? :confused:

A2QFI
9th Jun 2008, 19:09
SFAIK, in the fullness of time it may become compulsory to have an ID card but it will not be compulsory to carry it. If I live long enough to be forced to have one it will live in the deep freeze in my garage

Yarpy
9th Jun 2008, 20:07
If I live long enough to be forced to have one it will live in the deep freeze in my garage

You won't have to live very long if you are a pilot as we are in the first group to be 'issued' with them next year. Keeping the ID Card locked away will be a very good idea as the fine for losing it is in the region of £1000!

kluge
10th Jun 2008, 08:19
I have had an ID card (and passports as well - wow imagine that) in Hong Kong for 12 yrs and a chip based ID card for the last 3. No problems. Quite the opposite actually.
Helps with immigration efficiency to no end for those who have experienced automated immigration procedures. I think the fears of an ID card are unfounded. However as a UK issue guaranteed to elicit emotion it ranks up there with fox hunting, soccer hooligansim and public drunkenness.

It's only in the UK that one sees so many CCTV cameras. You think you have identify privacy. Then think again. CCTV is only one layer on the onion in what is one of the most monitored country's on the planet - even compared to totallitarian states.

So where's your Identity privacy ? Individuals can be tracked in so many different ways now. Oh and let's not forget the DNA database for all arrested persons as well. It's a binary world and one that will only increase. You create digital footprints now.

An ID card clarifies identity and removes ambiguity quickly. This is a good thing in a digital world. Given that data is collected about you now anyway (digital footprints again) it's in your interests to ensure that you are ID'd quickly and efficiently. In protecting your identity against theft - or helping to quickly restore it (think banks, tax liability, insurance and numerous others) as a result of theft, an ID card is an asset.

I think the concept as described by Plod is "elimination from enquiry". Please don't tell me everyone believes in the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" as well.

max_cont
10th Jun 2008, 09:03
Kluge thanks for that. That’s put my mind at ease no end. :rolleyes:

I opted out from having my medical records available to all…you wouldn’t believe the bun fight I had getting them to send the correspondence to the correct address and not somewhere else entirely. Apparently I don’t live where I think I do because the computer says my post code is something entirely different. :*

Carry an ID if you want, hell get yourself chipped if it makes you happy, but don’t force one at my expense on me. :mad:

Blacksheep
10th Jun 2008, 11:07
I opted out from having my medical records available to all…You needn't have bothered judging by the trouble I had getting them made available to my doctor... :rolleyes:

On the subject of identity and the theft therefor, one is reminded of the elderly chap who, having retired from many years in the loyal service of the Indian Railway system, regularly drew his pension every week. Someone at head office grew suspicious when they realised he had been retired for 60 years and was now more than 120 years old. So they checked his thumbprint on the receipt docket and to their surprise, the thumbprint matched. So, the following month they turned up at his post office with congratulatory presents and a pile of grub for the old fellow. But he never turned up. Not all of him that is. The family had his preserved thumb on a rubber stamp handle and, with the conivance of the post office clerk, had been drawing great-grandpa's pension since he had died thirty years earlier.

kluge
11th Jun 2008, 02:49
Entirely believeable - I guess the retinal scan equivalent would look like a chup-a-chup lolly.

max_cont: you can run but you can't hide, resistance is futile, in a data bank no one can hear you scream.......blah blah.....you just have to learn how to ride this new wave.
In this brave new world, anonymity will be the nirvana.


What is REALLY interesting is that individuals continue to believe that they live in free country's, have certain rights and that Govts look after their interests because they elected them. Govts perpetuate the myth and charge you PAYE for the privilege of living there.

hmm - sounds a bit Leninistic......didn't we win and what did we win exactly ?

Krystal n chips
11th Jun 2008, 05:19
This "rather unfortunate" glitch is yet but one more reason I continue to be averse to the proposed super data base for ID cards.....one kid decides to demonstrate his hacking skills and.........:mad:

No doubt the "reassurances to the public / lessons will be learned " mantra's will be vomited forth soon....as will the "nothing to fear" etc......the minor detail of public confidence in Gov't IT systems being conveniently overlooked.:}

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/7445684.stm