Slashdot Log In
Homeland Security Offers Details on Real ID
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat Mar 03, 2007 02:32 PM
from the always-been-at-war-with-eurasia dept.
from the always-been-at-war-with-eurasia dept.
pr0nqu33n writes "C|Net is running an article on the DHS's requirements for the Real ID system. Thursday members of the Bush administration finally unveiled details of the anticipated national identification program. Millions of Americans will have until 2013 to register for the system, which will (some would argue) constitute a national ID. RFID trackers for the cards are under consideration, as is a cohesive nation-wide design for the card. States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes. The full regulations for the system are available online in PDF format. Likewise, the DHS has a Questions and Answers style FAQ available to explain the program to the curious."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:5, Insightful)
"Where are your papers?"
Land of the free^wregistered, home of the brave^wslave.
Hmm...I could see this at the airport... (Score:2, Funny)
VOGEL: Weg.
INDY: Tickets please.
VOGEL: (in German) Was?
VOGEL glances up and recognizes INDY who quickly punches Vogel in the face, knocking him toward the window. In another quick move, Indy TOSSES HIM OUT THE WINDOW onto the tarmac below.
(Shocked Passengers blink in bewilderment.)
INDY: No ticket!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The US constitution does not specifically mention Freedom of Movement [wikipedia.org] (though the Supreme Court has ruled that it necessarily exists), it is in the UN declaration of human rights and the constitutions of other Western nations. Wikipedia says this:
"Freedom of movement, mobility rights or the right t
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I fully expect the answer to that to be RFID or something more advanced.
Yes, I do.
No, the database and the systems that monitor the database will do that. No need for the store to do anything but collect your ID automatically.
Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:5, Insightful)
You're in danger of losing your geek card here. RFID means you don't have to show the card; it means that it can be read if you're within a few meters without you having to take it out of your wallet. Very... convenient. Old tech ID in another country has no relevance to the RealID program getting under way here; RealID mandates biometric identification details (retina scan, something along those lines) as well as photo and statistical data (height, age, etc.), and most importantly "undisclosed additional technologies." With RFID, if I am standing at a checkout or a toll booth, and you approach, everything on your RealID card will pop up on my display I need to verify you, including the biometric data, arrest history, and anything else they deem interesting (perhaps the prescriptions you take, or your tendency to stutter. Your location and activity can then (still automatically) be passed along to a larger network for use in tracking, privacy invasion, feedforward to entities like insurance providers, banks, various police agencies, and so forth. No one need lift a finger. You just buy your booze or copy of playboy (you filthy bastard!) and go on your way. Later, when they make a law against playboy, they'll just come and get your ass. They already have numerous "punish previous legal behavior with new law" programs running, as well as numerous "add to your sentence after conviction" programs, both the very definition of ex post facto law, which are forbidden by the constitution. Of course, they're not paying any attention to the constitution any longer; another reason to compound our worries.
In the US - traditionally - we have held that our privacy is something we hold dear. This program can erode privacy significantly; that's the general basis for resisting it. But there are others. I don't want my insurance agency to be deciding to change my insurance rates if they find that I am out in the woods from time to time (I collect rocks.) They may decide I am in the same group with hunters or dirt bikers and so pose a higher risk, when in fact, I don't. This is the kind of thing where information about you can be used against you; and like "no-fly" lists, once someone has made a decision that you are an undesirable, they are not generally going to turn around and reverse that decision without a lot of work on your part; work that would be unnecessary if they had simply kept their nose out of your business.
Parent
Re: (Score:3)
Because there is no system in place that can track everyone; it would take millions of cameras on the road to even come close, and they'd still only be close, because you can always walk. Once RealID is fully implemented, every time you pass an RFID station, which means, every time you buy something or interact with a bank or use public transit or anywhere else they're interested in what you do, they'll get an automatic - no work required - database update that tells
Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes. And this is a step beyond those, sometimes several steps beyond. Are you OK with that? Are you OK with the fact that the government decides where and when you can go, if you drive, if someone else drives? It used to be that a transportation ticket for any destination within the USA had the following information: Where you got on (sometimes), and where you're supposed to get off. In the case of the NY subway, an ID-less token got you on, and you got off when and where you pleased. You could ride all day. And I often did. I'm old enough I've had plane and train tickets w/o personal identity information; got on in NYC, getting off in Washington. Nothing else. Could have handed it to my girlfriend, it would have been perfectly valid. Didn't used to be the government's business where you were, who you were, or where you were going except in the case where your skills were a safety issue, or in other words, when you drive. In that case, the state has a compelling interest in your competence, and that is what a driver's license is supposed to attest to, not what your real name is or anything else - just that you can drive; the fact that it identifies you is peripheral to its purpose, not the other way around. These days, that's no longer true, but I submit that it is not a good thing at all.
In short, I agree, you're right in the technical sense, they are asking for more and more papers. I firmly believe that's 100% the wrong way to go, and that whatever good you might get out of it, it'll never make up for the enormous bad that it brings. I am not a criminal; I absolutely resent being treated like one. If someone is determined to be a criminal, hang a fucking GPS/RFID/venomous bracelet 'round their ankle if you must let them wander in public, otherwise incarcerate them or exterminate them, but do not bring the presumption of guilt onto the head of every warm body in the country.
I hate this whole "mommy" government thing, top to bottom. We don't need it, there are better ways to go, and getting it is going to hurt us a lot, count on it.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No. I didn't say that, imply it, or bring up other countries at all. Strawman.
The US is my country. It is my own backyard. Strawman.
Selective service. You bring this up, why? Are you trying to point out that the issue of having your name in a database somewhere already exists in v
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You know what bothers me the most? Not that you asked the question, but that you asked it as if you really thought it was a reasonable one. I am not often actually stunned by ignorance, but in this case, I admit it. I am floored.
All those things were possible in my lifetime. All of them. I've been into Canada without ID; for Expo 67 (the world's fair), specifically, so that was 1967. I've been into and back out of Mexico without ID. I've been in and out of the Bahamas without ID. I've been on many aircr
I hope this falls flat (Score:5, Insightful)
States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes.
I hope that enough states refuse [wikipedia.org] to participate that it makes the federal legistlature repeal the law. Of course, congress will likely do as they've always done and threaten to pull federal highway funding or education funding until the states in question comply.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, the limit was "reasonable and prudent" in those states, which in the plains and the deserts means "unless it's raining go for the rev limiter"
*sigh*
Re:I hope this falls flat (Score:4, Informative)
For example, take Colorado. Their land-grant institution, CSU, is supposed to be the premier state-run school. However, only about 8% of the budget is provided for by the state. The rest of it is mostly provided by student loans (in turn, provided by the government) and federal government grants.
So, if Colorado ever wanted to exert a state right over a federal right, Congress can easily cut education funding for the state and watch the state universities collapse.
It's sad that states are so dependent on the teat of Uncle Sam. Of course, if they wanted to provide the services through the state, the resulting state tax increase (followed by no federal tax increase) would insure the whole government got voted out.
I wonder if the founding fathers would be saddened by how state governments basically only have the rights and duties the federal government doesn't care to control. Look how easily ID systems just went from state control to federal control - barely any fighting that Joe Q Public even noticed! What state right is next?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm. Revolution: Maybe states ought to make a law that all fuel/road/highway taxes stay in-state, and cannot be "fed" to the feds; then they can build their own highways. Of course, it wouldn't work here in Montana; too much land, not enough taxpayers. Same thing for edumactionisming; figure out the portion of the federal taxes that go to education, and take them before the fed does, and indemnify the taxpayer - by force against the feds if need be - from paying the fed, then handle your own education cost
Good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)
It will go down the same way with Real ID, just watch. It might be the Mormons or some blue state that stands up but they'll be told fine, pay for your own highways (though we'll still take your tax money) and good luck to any of your citizens who want to fly. And conversations will be had behind closed doors about the way things have to be and it will be done.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Look at your proportion of tax dollars paid to the feds vs your state. That's the same amount of control your state has over it's own "state" law. When a stae lowers it's income tax or property tax to attract residents, it loses some autonomy. Imagine what a diverse country we would live in if States had equal power and money to the Fed.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That is what Alberta threatened to do a few years ago during a Federal spat and the Canadian government backtracked very quickly. Of course it helps that Alberta is just about the only province that actually pays anything.
Another Alberta trick is to threaten to replace the RCMP with a provincial police force, which wil
Re: (Score:2)
States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes.
I hope that enough states refuse to participate that it makes the federal legislature repeal the law. Of course, congress will likely do as they've always done and threaten to pull federal highway funding or education funding until the states in question comply.
Except, in this c
Smoke and mirrors (Score:5, Insightful)
All 19 of the 9/11 hijackers had valid photo ID and a valid boarding pass.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Troll? Fucking troll? For crying out loud, mods, fix this - that is anything but a troll comment! It is topical, relevant, true and thought provoking. /P.
Parent is not trolling (Score:2, Insightful)
How is that a "Troll"? (Score:3, Insightful)
So pointing out that the terrorists had authentic identification does contradict the premise of Real ID.
Do not confuse terrorism with identification. These cards will NOT carry the "may be a terrorist" stamp when they are issued.
Re: (Score:2)
Only Government approved terrorists and fraudsters will receive REAL ID.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In the wake of 9/11, the people at the DHS are under enormous pressure to do something about security.
What's been lost is the difference between doing something about it is and doing anything about it. Read ID is the later.
Re:How is that a "Fake ID"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Smoke and mirrors (Score:5, Insightful)
This is absolutely true and D.C. is trying to get the rest of the people to become sheep and give up their rights. If no new information is being collected, no new requirements are being mandated, then exactly why is this necessary?
9-11 was cited as the reason for this in the FAQ (for those who RTFAQ) and it is complete and utter bull.
States that are trying to reject this (so far) include:
Maine (passed)
Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, Washington, California, and Texas)
This is EXACTLY a national ID card, and we already have the right to board aircraft. The problem is that we LET D.C. regulate states! Mod parent up - this is "national security" at its worst.
Parent
Mod him up ? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, it's true : those terrorist had valid non-counterfeit IDs, linking them to the identities they used in the states and with which they didn't have any problem. Serious terrorist are supposed to keep low profile until last moment and ID linking to central database will be no help having a centralized national database won't bring any new information. (Except if "Al Qaida" provides a database of all identity of their terrorist. But as Al Qaida is more a "franchise" used by small groups [and used by the media to scare people] rather than a real well organised corporation, that not possible even in theory...)
Politicians should stop pretending that the ID is some magical problem that'll definitely fix the terrorism problem for sure. Here in Europe, almost every country has ID, but *that* isn't what will stop some of them of being targeted by attacks.
An ID card is just a convenient and standardized way for quickly showing who you are, for all those moments where you need it (before entering in nightclubs. while buying alcohol, when going to the administration, to prove you are the owner when using credit card). And that is the only thing politician should ever pretend. All the rest are lies. An ID card will never show what people *intend to do* and will never ever stop terrorists.
Parent
Your papers, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's worse than that. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, most terrorists in the US have had authentic identification issued by the US government (or accepted by it).
The real terrorists will have no problem complying with this law.
Not only that, but it will be run by people. And people can be corrupted. A single ID card that is accepted as valid anywhere in the US becomes very valuable. So some low grade government paper pusher decides that he can make a bit of money on the side by approving fake requests. So the illegals in Texas are getting ID cards issued by a corrupt guy in New York.
Yeah, if you wanted to help crime NATIONWIDE, you really couldn't come up with a better plan than this.
Parent
I disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
With a national ID, ideally it would have the resources behind it to be stronger than any single state ID. However, any fraud protection is useless when you can just pay off a DMV employee, again as some of the hijackers did. The problem with national ID is not that it's in any way worse at IDing people. It's not. The problem is that is does nothing to deter or hinder terrorists, and that trying to know who everyone is at all times (and where they are if you are checked frequently enough) is extremely unamerican. It's a papers-please society, and its very bad. But it _is_ efficient, and that's unfortunately not an argument against it.
Parent
Write Your Representatives (Score:5, Informative)
Peter
Downsize DC (Score:2)
It makes us less secure (Score:4, Interesting)
Because reading it off the front isn't good enough? Why would they need to scan my address unless they wanted to send me junk mail or make a database of my drinking habits? This is security theater at best.
In two of three cases, safer. (Score:2)
From the QA:
the official purposes of a REAL ID license to those listed by Congress in the law: accessing a Federal facility; boarding Federally-regulated commercial aircraft; and entering nuclear power plants.
You are safer on a bus and outside of nuclear power plants than you are on an airplane or inside a nuclear power plant. See, big brother is watching out for you after all.
Getting spammed by bars, and crushing political opposition, free speech and the American way, are an unfortunate side effects
we already have sufficient ID (Score:5, Interesting)
come next May IF your state says NO you are SOL (Score:2)
zero to lawsuit (Score:5, Insightful)
Air travel? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd be curious to know exactly what law gives the federal government control over who can fly, instead of the airlines or the airport. If there is such a law, is it constitutional? Interstate commerce is the only federal juristiction I can think of that's close - but that doesn't apply to civilian passengers with nothing to sell...
Interstate Commerce covers everything (Score:4, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich [wikipedia.org]
Parent
How the fuck did this come to pass? (Score:2)
So, we have until 2013 to become registered and with card right, what if we don't register? Are we just not admitted into federal buildings and airplanes as the article says? Or can businesses start not allowing customers entrance to their places without a card? Will businesses be able to shut
So, let's actually read the article... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/laws/gc_117276763568
"In the proposed rule, DHS is proposing to limit the official purposes of a REAL ID license to those listed by Congress in the law: accessing a Federal facility; boarding Federally-regulated commercial aircraft; and entering nuclear power plants."
"Is this a National ID card? No. The proposed regulations establish common standards for States to issue licenses. The Federal Government is not issuing the licenses, is not collecting information about license holders, and is not requiring States to transmit license holder information to the Federal Government that the Government does not already have (such as a Social Security Number)."
"Will a national database be created that stores information about every applicant? No. The REAL ID Act and these regulations do not establish a national database of driver information. States will continue to collect and store information about applicants as they do today. The NPRM does not propose to change this practice and would not give the Federal government any greater access to this information."
"DHS is proposing minimum standards that will appear on the face of the card. The proposed regulation would require each of the following on the face of REAL IDs; space available for 39 characters for full legal name; address of principal residence; digital photograph; gender; date of birth; signature, document number; and machine readable technology."
"What is the Machine Readable Technology specified in the NPRM? The regulations propose the use of the 2-D barcode already used by 46 jurisdictions (45 States and the District of Columbia). DHS leans towards encrypting the data on the barcode as a privacy protection and requests comments on how to proceed given operational considerations."
So, let's see. What we're *actually* looking at is federal standards on what information needs to be displayed on state ID cards, and how identity needs to be proved prior to the issuance of a state ID card.
Gee, that's actually a lot less threatening then all the comments are making it sound. Hmm...
Why Is this Bad? (Score:2)
I'm being totally serious here. Please don't flame. I just would like someone to carefully explain why a National ID is bad. We already have State IDs (Driver's Licenses) which are are required for virtually everything. We also have Passports, which some may argue are optional, but they are certainly not optional if you want to leave the country. We also have Social Security numbers and cards which you have to present if you want to get a job anywhere. The SSNs are presumably primary keys to a big database
How will they staff the building? (Score:2)
I hope my state doesn't comply. It will be interesting to see how the feds are planning to staff their buildings with 100% out-of-state employees. I can see it now: "Sorry, Judge! Even though you were elected to serve in California, you can't enter the building...because your id is from California."
If big air-travel states opt out it's doomed (Score:3, Interesting)
The "ultimate" backup plan for the feds is to require passports for internal travel. Insert In Soviet Russia joke here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Bush aides charged with speaking to the public and the media are kept out of the loop on some of the most important issues. And bad news is dumped before the weekend for the sole purpose of burying it.
With a candor that is frowned upon at the White House, Martin explained the use of late-Friday statements. "Fewer people pay attention to it late on Friday," she said. "Fewer people pay attention when it's reported on Sa
Re: (Score:2)